March 6, 2024 - Bank of Canada holds key rate steady at 5% | Page 5 | General financial discussion | Discussion forum

mordko said
...
I would question if these taxes will impact consumer behaviour. ... 

Correct... not in any meaningful and positive way.

Alexandre said
...
For me, Carbon Tax is less about the environment, because there is no unified agreement on environmental benefits from that tax. But as a reduction of oil consumption, combined with subsidies for electrification of transportation, its benefit is clear: North American energy independence from unfriendly nations.
Same in EU.
...

The first half of your statement is accurate... it is not about the environment... and, there is no unified agreement on benefits, because there is no benefit... at least none that is positively meaningful.

Electrification definitely has its benefits, but not for the reasons commonly put forward, as it carries it own HUGE costs and issues, including foreign dependencies, especially on less than friendly regimes for rare-earth minerals (e.g. ChHina, with over 60% world lithium refining capacity, importing 90% of Australia's exports; which produces over 50% of world lithium), on the backs of slave and child labour (e.g. Congo alone provides 60%+ of the needed cobalt), and so on. It also carries SO MANY false hopes.

As for "fossil fuels", there is no such thing. That oft use naming has become so common place, without enough people questioning it, but has never been proven... pure speculation. Carbon-based fuels? yes.

So what is the real need to push for the reduction of the use of carbon-based fuels? It certainly not for the reasons often put forward:

Anyway, this conversation has sure gone on a rabbit trail...

Alexandre said

If unfriendly nation cuts oil/petroleum supply to the US, the impact will be felt immediately by everyone.
...

The US WAS COMPLETELY energy independent only 3 1/2 yrs ago. It can happen again. Not that other forms of energy should not be pursued but there is no need for anything else to happen. And it can happen in very short order.

Even further off topic, CBC has been reporting on research into the economics of electric vehicles, and it's not encouraging. By their calculations, one has to do a good bit of driving - about 50-100km/day depending on province - over seven years to come out ahead. And that's only if you have home charging facilities, as public ones are twice the price or more.

Those calculations include governmental subsidies, which go only to first-time buyers. This worsens the already-poor resale value of EVs, as subsequent buyers don't get subsidies. And if you keep an EV for seven years, you've lost a good portion of your range, and if it gets smashed up in the meantime you lose all your upcoming benefit.

Replacing EV batteries is as expensive as buying a used combustion-engine car, and at least for now you may not be able to obtain a new battery for many EVs at all - most are back-ordered and not on the way as the manufacturers are struggling to get enough batteries for new EVs.

One family I know has leased two used EVs (sequentially) and is very happy with them. They charge at home and have combustion-engine cars for backup, using the EV for short commutes and shopping trips.

So, for the moment, EVs are still for the well-heeled homeowner. We need more progress before we can get to 100% EV purchase.

Hmm... I wonder... Can one charge one's EV with home solar panels affordably?

Car thieves AND EV are the reasons car insurance premium are going thru the roof. That’s another negative for EV.
So many stories out there about total write off on an otherwise good condition EV just because it was involved in a minor accident and cuz it ran over something potentially compromising the integrity of the battery, the only way to do a proper fix is full battery replacement, and that can cost more than the value of the car….

RetirEd said
Even further off topic, CBC has been reporting on research into the economics of electric vehicles, and it's not encouraging. By their calculations, one has to do a good bit of driving - about 50-100km/day depending on province - over seven years to come out ahead. And that's only if you have home charging facilities, as public ones are twice the price or more.

Those calculations include governmental subsidies, which go only to first-time buyers. This worsens the already-poor resale value of EVs, as subsequent buyers don't get subsidies. And if you keep an EV for seven years, you've lost a good portion of your range, and if it gets smashed up in the meantime you lose all your upcoming benefit.

Replacing EV batteries is as expensive as buying a used combustion-engine car, and at least for now you may not be able to obtain a new battery for many EVs at all - most are back-ordered and not on the way as the manufacturers are struggling to get enough batteries for new EVs.

One family I know has leased two used EVs (sequentially) and is very happy with them. They charge at home and have combustion-engine cars for backup, using the EV for short commutes and shopping trips.

So, for the moment, EVs are still for the well-heeled homeowner. We need more progress before we can get to 100% EV purchase.

Hmm... I wonder... Can one charge one's EV with home solar panels affordably?  

You could easily recharge an EV at home from solar panels if they made EVs which were efficient and thus required much smaller batteries. These performance SUV EVs and sports or luxury EV cars all with their giant batteries accomplish nothing other than giving the well healed more toys on the backs of tax payers. I think there's some cool tech there, but don't tell me you're saving the planet or money.

An EV that is not fast charged and taken care of will not lose that much range over 7 years unless the battery is defective. Someone buying a used EV won't need to worry about not getting a rebate, because the resale value of EVs is plummeting as people get afraid of battery issues and I think begin to realize these are so tech heavy that cutting edge EV today will be vastly inferiror compared to the tech 5 years from now. IMO EVs are glorified smartphones which are much more of a consumable than a traditional ICE vehicle which was never a good investment either outside of the covid madness.

Also keep in mind that those numbers CBC gives are only valid if you're going to buy a like vehicle in EV or ICE form. What I mean is if you just want an economical car, there are no EV options and actually, there aren't many ICE options anymore either, but there still are some. So if you're in the market for an economical vehicle and not a vehicle like a 3 series, your break even vs an EV is closer to 20 years because you have to substantially upgrade your type of vehicle to get an EV.

I don't drive that much consistently anymore and one thing I really don't like about these current EVs is how much charge they lose when sitting dormant, because they're never really dormant, like most smartphones. Not to mention the loss of energy in the charging process as well, if you let your car sit at the airport while you're on a trip you can come back to a dead battery. Imagine having to go top off your ICE vehicle with gas because you didn't drive it for a few days and you needed to start off on a full tank.

I personally don't buy into the whole EVs are better for the planet narrative and I don't care if climate change is true or not. Why do people need a reason to try to pollute, consume less? Shouldn't that just be stuff you do without persuasion?

I do care that I'm paying tax dollars to subsidize EV manufacturers and buyers when I can't even get a family doctor and am on a 5 year waiting list because mine left to practice privately in another province without notifying any of their patients and so I've been on the phone for multiple hours trying to get some needed care for a family member, but public health is either hanging up on me, sending me to a nurse in the wrong province or refusing all together to take my call! Even if EVs were our saviours as sold by the government, what do I care if I can't get the healthcare my family needs to make it to the future?