Elbiler er giver ingen miljø fordel

Dansk Folkeparti, Diverse, Grøn energi, Klima, Sort energi, Videnskab, miljø, Økonomi og finans — Drokles on February 22, 2015 at 10:02 am

Finans skriver at der kun er 10 måneder tilbage af el-bilernes fritagelse for afgift, hvilket skatteminister Benny Engelbrecht “er meget opmærksom på”. Så der skal findes en løsning - åbenbart

»Det er vigtigt at skubbe elbilmarkedet i gang. Men det skal være for en kortere årrække, indtil vi kommer igennem med en omlægning af registreringsafgiften, så bilerne generelt bliver billigere,« lød det dengang fra Brian Mikkelsen.

Hos Dansk Folkeparti er Dennis Flydtkjær mere fortaler for en generel omlægning af bilafgifterne.

»En forlængelse af afgiftsfritagelsen giver ikke stabile rammevilkår for elbilbranchen, men skaber derimod usikkerhed om, hvordan vilkårerne vil være på længere sigt. Løsningen er derfor en generel omlægning af bilafgifterne, hvor elbilerne også er passet ind,« lød hans begrundelse.

Frank Aaen fra Enhedslisten er også tilhænger af en samlet løsning for bilafgifterne. Men alternativt er han indstillet på en særløsning for elbilerne. Den kan så finansieres ved at ophæve fradrag i bilbeskatningen.

Frank Aaen har eksempelvis peget på, at der gives et fradrag på 1.000 kr. for at sætte en radio i bilen. Sikkerhedsudstyr som selealarmer og airbags giver også fradrag i afgiften.

Men Bjørn Lomborg gør sit til at ødelægge den gode stemning ved i USA Today at påpege at el-bilen som et økologisk alternativ er en myte. “For every dollar of cost, the electric car does less than half a cent of good.” konkluderer Lomborg og giver nogle eksempler

The most popular electric car, a Nissan Leaf, over a 90,000-mile lifetime will emit 31 metric tons of CO2, based on emissions from its production, its electricity consumption at average U.S. fuel mix and its ultimate scrapping. A comparable diesel Mercedes CDI A160 over a similar lifetime will emit 3 tons more across its production, diesel consumption and ultimate scrapping.

The results are similar for the top-line Tesla car, emitting about 44 tons, about 5 tons less than a similar Audi A7 Quattro.

Subsidies vs. savings

Yes, in both cases the electric car is better, but only by a tiny bit. Avoiding 3 tons of CO2 would cost less than $27 on Europe’s emissions trading market. The annual benefit is about the cost of a cup of coffee. Yet U.S. taxpayers spend up to $7,500 in tax breaks for less than $27 of climate benefits. That’s a bad deal.

The other main benefit from electric cars was supposed to be lower air pollution. Yes, it might be powered by coal, but unlike the regular car, coal emissions are far away from the city centers where more people live and where damage from air pollution hits hardest.

However, new research in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences found that while gasoline cars pollute closer to home, coal-fired power pollutes a lot more.

(…)

Of course, electric car proponents would venture that the perceived rapid ramp-up of renewables will make future electric cars much cleaner. This, however, is mostly wishful thinking. Today, the U.S. gets 14% of its electric power from renewables. In 25 years, Obama’s Energy Information Administration estimates this will have gone up just 3 percentage points to 17%.

(…)

Proponents could also argue that the more mileage an electric car logs, the more its carbon footprint is reduced because the battery production is a significant part of their total emissions.

Yet, it hardly matters. The added mileage saves little in the way of emissions, and the electric car’s extended use might mean it would have to replace its batteries, entirely blowing the climate benefit.

Hvad Lomborg dog glemmer er den følelse af moralsk overlegenhed en afgiftsfri Tesla giver. Og hvis ikke det kvalificerede til et fradrag…

0 Kommentarer »

Ingen kommentarer endnu.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Kommentér indlægget...

Monokultur kører på WordPress