Despite a common perception that electric vehicles are cheaper to own and operate than their internal combustion counterparts, a Texas think tank says the true cost is the equivalent of USD$17.33 per gallon — or CAD$6.32 per litre — over the life of the car, after factoring in subsidies and incentives.The calculations were based on full cycle costs, including charging equipment, associated incentives and both direct and indirect subsidies in the form of avoided fuel taxes, averaged over 10 years and 120,000 miles..“It is not an overstatement to say that the federal government is subsidizing EVs to a greater degree than even wind and solar electricity generation and embarking on an unprecedented endeavour to remake the entire American auto industry.”Texas Public Policy Foundation.And that’s not even factoring in emissions.“Setting aside some of the questionable assumptions used in deriving such favorable economics for EVs, no one has attempted to calculate the full financial benefit of the wide array of direct subsidies, regulatory credits, and subsidized infrastructure that contribute to the economic viability of EVs,” wrote Brent Bennett and Jason Isaac on behalf of the Texas Public Policy Foundation.“It is not an overstatement to say that the federal government is subsidizing EVs to a greater degree than even wind and solar electricity generation and embarking on an unprecedented endeavour to remake the entire American auto industry.”Although the report’s conclusions apply more directly south of the border, it’s safe to extrapolate their findings to Canada given the integrated nature of the North American auto manufacturing industry..Despite lavish subsidies on both sides of the border — to manufacturers as well as consumers — the report suggests companies such as Ford are losing more than $70,000 on each EV it currently sells. Consequently, Inventory is stacking up in dealer lots for several brands as sales fail to keep pace with government-mandated production quotas and stricter fuel efficiency standards that force conventional automakers to purchase credits from all-electric ones, namely, Tesla. “Therefore, it is likely that automakers will be requesting even more direct subsidies in the coming years.”In Canada, the federal government has handed out more than CAD$30 billion to automakers such as Volkswagen and Stellantis to lure them into building battery plants in southern Ontario.And those are just the direct subsidies. The true indirect tally is potentially an order of magnitude higher..EVs tend to be heavier and cause more damage to pavement than conventional cars and trucks.That’s because EV owners don’t pay the true cost of upgrading and maintaining the electrical grid to accommodate the increased load from higher numbers of EVs on the road, which amounts to a handout from regular electricity consumers. It also doesn’t include road maintenance — EVs tend to be heavier and cause more damage to pavement than conventional cars and trucks — because they avoid fuel taxes and surcharges that would otherwise go into preserving the road network.Other exclusions include billions of dollars in taxpayer-funded subsidies for electric buses, trucks and truck stops, plus the addition of charging infrastructure at public facilities such as ports and airports..Or the unaccounted cost of EVs in terms of additional emissions from power plants and the embedded environmental costs of the EV supply chain including materials used to make the batteries themselves..Not to mention building construction costs as municipalities move to require “EV-ready” construction in new homes and buildings..“The lesson to be learned from this study is that markets, not government, drive innovation and efficiency… despite the massive financial and regulatory advantages being offered to EVs.”.Then there’s the fact that EVs simply don’t last as long as their ICE counterparts, resulting in fewer miles driven per car. “Of course, a higher EV scrappage rate and, in turn, fewer miles traveled compared to gasoline vehicles should also be accounted for in any cost-benefit analysis,” it said..“The lesson to be learned from this study is that markets, not government, drive innovation and efficiency… despite the massive financial and regulatory advantages being offered to EVs.”
Despite a common perception that electric vehicles are cheaper to own and operate than their internal combustion counterparts, a Texas think tank says the true cost is the equivalent of USD$17.33 per gallon — or CAD$6.32 per litre — over the life of the car, after factoring in subsidies and incentives.The calculations were based on full cycle costs, including charging equipment, associated incentives and both direct and indirect subsidies in the form of avoided fuel taxes, averaged over 10 years and 120,000 miles..“It is not an overstatement to say that the federal government is subsidizing EVs to a greater degree than even wind and solar electricity generation and embarking on an unprecedented endeavour to remake the entire American auto industry.”Texas Public Policy Foundation.And that’s not even factoring in emissions.“Setting aside some of the questionable assumptions used in deriving such favorable economics for EVs, no one has attempted to calculate the full financial benefit of the wide array of direct subsidies, regulatory credits, and subsidized infrastructure that contribute to the economic viability of EVs,” wrote Brent Bennett and Jason Isaac on behalf of the Texas Public Policy Foundation.“It is not an overstatement to say that the federal government is subsidizing EVs to a greater degree than even wind and solar electricity generation and embarking on an unprecedented endeavour to remake the entire American auto industry.”Although the report’s conclusions apply more directly south of the border, it’s safe to extrapolate their findings to Canada given the integrated nature of the North American auto manufacturing industry..Despite lavish subsidies on both sides of the border — to manufacturers as well as consumers — the report suggests companies such as Ford are losing more than $70,000 on each EV it currently sells. Consequently, Inventory is stacking up in dealer lots for several brands as sales fail to keep pace with government-mandated production quotas and stricter fuel efficiency standards that force conventional automakers to purchase credits from all-electric ones, namely, Tesla. “Therefore, it is likely that automakers will be requesting even more direct subsidies in the coming years.”In Canada, the federal government has handed out more than CAD$30 billion to automakers such as Volkswagen and Stellantis to lure them into building battery plants in southern Ontario.And those are just the direct subsidies. The true indirect tally is potentially an order of magnitude higher..EVs tend to be heavier and cause more damage to pavement than conventional cars and trucks.That’s because EV owners don’t pay the true cost of upgrading and maintaining the electrical grid to accommodate the increased load from higher numbers of EVs on the road, which amounts to a handout from regular electricity consumers. It also doesn’t include road maintenance — EVs tend to be heavier and cause more damage to pavement than conventional cars and trucks — because they avoid fuel taxes and surcharges that would otherwise go into preserving the road network.Other exclusions include billions of dollars in taxpayer-funded subsidies for electric buses, trucks and truck stops, plus the addition of charging infrastructure at public facilities such as ports and airports..Or the unaccounted cost of EVs in terms of additional emissions from power plants and the embedded environmental costs of the EV supply chain including materials used to make the batteries themselves..Not to mention building construction costs as municipalities move to require “EV-ready” construction in new homes and buildings..“The lesson to be learned from this study is that markets, not government, drive innovation and efficiency… despite the massive financial and regulatory advantages being offered to EVs.”.Then there’s the fact that EVs simply don’t last as long as their ICE counterparts, resulting in fewer miles driven per car. “Of course, a higher EV scrappage rate and, in turn, fewer miles traveled compared to gasoline vehicles should also be accounted for in any cost-benefit analysis,” it said..“The lesson to be learned from this study is that markets, not government, drive innovation and efficiency… despite the massive financial and regulatory advantages being offered to EVs.”
