|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
By Michael Bielawski
The governor’s office has announced special discounts regarding electric vehicles and gas car buyouts, the program is specifically seeking those who lost vehicles due to the recent floods.
“Governor Phil Scott and the Vermont Agency of Transportation today announced it will again modify its vehicle incentive programs for Vermonters whose personal vehicles were damaged by flooding in an effort to provide increased financial support to households affected by last week’s flooding and to expedite the transition to plug-in electric vehicles.”
This means the government is going to use its funds to help purchase Vermonter’s gas vehicles and offer them discounts on electric vehicles, despite some red flags that the electric car industry is hitting roadblocks.
The governor states, “Me and my team are doing everything we can to give immediate relief to Vermonters as we continue to assess and respond to the needs,” he said. “This program will help those whose vehicles were flooded upgrade to a new vehicle that’s better for the environment.”
Some details on what’s being offered include the Replace Your Ride Program that allows up to $5,000 for those who swap in their gas- or diesel-powered cars for “cleaner transportation options.” If a vehicle is being replaced specifically for flood damage, there will be further special offers.
The release states, “The Incentive Program for New Plug-in Electric Vehicles (PEVs), which currently provides up to $5,000 for a new purchased or leased PEV, will provide an additional $1,000 incentive (up to $6,000 total) to eligible Vermonters replacing a flood-damaged vehicle.”
There is also the MileageSmart Program, this program “provides up to 25% of a vehicle’s price, will automatically provide a full $5,000 incentive to Vermonters replacing a flood-damaged vehicle.”
Third it states that “Program participants may use these programs to bundle different state incentives, for as much as to $11,000 off the price of a new PEV and a maximum of $10,000 off the price of a used PEV, as well as with other local utility rebates and federal tax credits.”
Transportation Secretary Joe Flynn said, “As our Agency works to restore the state’s critical infrastructure, we also recognize the devastating personal losses sustained by Vermonters during the flooding last week. We hope that these changes to our vehicle incentive programs will help people who are struggling after the recent flooding and also help curb the worst effects of climate change.”
Paid for by taxpayers
The think tank Texas Public Policy Foundation in late 2023 published a study revealing that the true cost of EVs was much different than the average sticker price. That’s because of 10s of billions in subsidies that are invested in the new technology.
“According to the TPPF report — authored by energy experts Jason Isaac, Brent Bennett and Syd Lucas — the average model year 2021 EV would cost approximately $48,698 more to own over a 10-year period without the staggering $22 billion in taxpayer-funded handouts that the government provides to electric car manufacturers and owners. The analysis factors in federal fuel efficiency programs, electric grid strain, and direct state and federal subsidies.”
Unhappy customers?
John Klar, former GOP gubernatorial candidate and political writer, recently put out a commentary noting that in addition to high costs, the experiences of EV customers according to polls are not so great.
“A recent consumer survey revealed that 46% of US electric car owners wish to switch back to a gas-powered car. In an industry already facing hurdles with charging stations, cost, and public skepticism, consumer distaste over performance and a hefty price tag threatens to eviscerate future EV sales. Despite subsidies and claims of world-saving environmental necessity, consumers are balking in droves at lackluster EV performance in a declining economy.”
An industry-wide slowdown
In the overall economy, EV sales are down despite all the subsidies. Green Car Reports put out an article on Wednesday noting that sales are missing their targets for the nation’s largest automaker.
“General Motors CEO Mary Barra has walked back the automaker’s target of having production capacity for one million EVs in 2025, blaming slowing demand,” they reported.
It continues, “Barra told CNBC (via Bloomberg) at an event July 15 that GM wouldn’t have the planned production capacity in place by next year, adding that customer demand would determine how quickly GM would reach one million annual EV sales, and that it’s currently seeing a slowdown in EV deliveries.
The author is a writer for the Vermont Daily Chronicle
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Energy, State Government, Transportation
This is just another reason not to vote for this clown, what a pathetic so-called leader
pushing the EV nonsense during a tragedy, Vermont, you might as well vote for a progressive, as that’s what you have now, Scott’s a RINO through and through !!
I wouldn’t be caught dead in an EV, because I would probably be found dead in one (either burned up, or frozen to death out on the highway). Nor would I park an EV anywhere near my house, or allow anyone else to do so.
OMG!! Don’t ask “what next?”
whats next//// ev race car at thunder road with govie at the wheel/////
Make it mandatory (Governor executive orders) for the legislators to have EV’s. Then when power is interrupted, and no charging place available or can’t get to, they wouldn’t make it to Montpelier to do damage legislation. But they will still get travel money, meals and motel expense, without receipts for proof.
“A recent consumer survey revealed that 46% of US electric car owners wish to switch back to a gas-powered car.” No citation for this claim, which sounds fishy to me. I’ve never met, or talked with, anyone who wasn’t satisfied, with their EV.
That’s funny. I’ve never talked to an EV owner who was really satisfied with their EV. But then again, most of my friends aren’t dumb enough to buy one…
I wonder if the Governor ever reads statistics or comments about the failing EV program. – or other failed prog policies for that matter. It seems he only listens to either activists or progressive ideologs and is swayed by their bias.
The only reason to ‘push’ electric vehicles at this point in time is the mistaken assumption that gasoline and diesel vehicles cause climate change by producing CO2. Of course, as scientific reasoning now suggests, we’ve learned that CO2 is not the culprit and is, in fact, beneficial. That the Governor and Vermont legislators think they know better than the World Climate Declaration by two thousand prominent scientists and researchers is indicative of incompetence, coercion, or corruption. Sorry folks. There are no other explanations.
AFP Factcheck: A “World Climate Declaration” signed by more than 1,200 people and widely shared on social media challenges the scientific consensus on human-driven climate change. But only a small number of the signatories are climate scientists, some have links to the oil industry or climate-skeptic organizations, and the claims have been widely debunked.
A global network of over 1900 scientists and professionals has prepared this urgent message. Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific. Scientists should openly address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of their policy measures.
Natural as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming
The geological archive reveals that Earth’s climate has varied as long as the planet has existed, with natural cold and warm phases. The Little Ice Age ended as recently as 1850. Therefore, it is no surprise that we now are experiencing a period of warming.
Warming is far slower than predicted
The world has warmed significantly less than predicted by IPCC on the basis of modeled anthropogenic forcing. The gap between the real world and the modeled world tells us that we are far from understanding climate change.
Climate policy relies on inadequate models
Climate models have many shortcomings and are not remotely plausible as global policy tools. They blow up the effect of greenhouse gases such as CO2. In addition, they ignore the fact that enriching the atmosphere with CO2 is beneficial.
CO2 is plant food, the basis of all life on Earth
CO2 is not a pollutant. It is essential to all life on Earth. Photosynthesis is a blessing. More CO2 is beneficial for nature, greening the Earth: additional CO2 in the air has promoted growth in global plant biomass. It is also good for agriculture, increasing the yields of crops worldwide.
Global warming has not increased natural disasters
There is no statistical evidence that global warming is intensifying hurricanes, floods, droughts and suchlike natural disasters, or making them more frequent. However, there is ample evidence that CO2-mitigation measures are as damaging as they are costly.
Climate policy must respect scientific and economic realities
There is no climate emergency. Therefore, there is no cause for panic and alarm. We strongly oppose the harmful and unrealistic net-zero CO2 policy proposed for 2050. If better approaches emerge, and they certainly will, we have ample time to reflect and re-adapt. The aim of global policy should be ‘prosperity for all’ by providing reliable and affordable energy at all times. In a prosperous society men and women are well educated, birthrates are low and people care about their environment.
Epilogue
The World Climate Declaration (WCD) has brought a large variety of competent scientists together from all over the world*. The considerable knowledge and experience of this group is indispensable in reaching a balanced, dispassionate and competent view of climate change.
From now onward the group is going to function as “Global Climate Intelligence Group”. The CLINTEL Group will give solicited and unsolicited advice on climate change and energy transition to governments and companies worldwide.
* It is not the number of experts but the quality of arguments that counts
John Feldman’s 2023 documentary film Regenerating Life teaches that the most important greenhouse gas is water, not carbon dioxide, and that it is the water cycle that regulates the temperature of the planet.
Straightforwardly told with beautiful images, many from Vermont. Do plan to see this last segment of the film and be refreshed in knowing that the abundant life all around us in our own community is a vital jewel in the Earth’s ecosystem needful of our love and protection.
Our story so far in a nutshell, courtesy of a great explanation in Paul Hawken’s book REGENERATION pg 98:
Approximately 80% of the Earth’s surface temperature is determined by the hydrosphere, the sum of all the water in the atmosphere and on the earth. Over the past two centuries the earth has been drying out. Deforestation, industrial agriculture, overgrazing, and increased heat have desiccated lands, raising surface temperatures. Regenerative agriculture cools its environs. Surface temperatures can be more than 1 degree C lower, which helps plants grow, and soil temperatures can be many degrees lower than bare soil.
And then there are the Milankovitch cycles that are the driving force behind ice ages, climate shifts and habitability of planets.
No one is saying the earth’s climate isn’t getting warmer. It most certainly is. But CO2 (man-made or otherwise) is not the reason. And the only justification for pushing electric vehicles is that they limit CO2. And the only mitigation to warming offered by you and our legislators is to limit CO2.
Again, from the World Climate Declaration – “It is not the number of experts but the quality of arguments that counts.”
Even the most recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report says nothing that specifically counters the World Climate Declaration.
If the claims from the Clintel scientists and researchers have been debunked, Mark Whoever-You-Are, show us. If the scientists in the Regenerating Life documentary have been debunked, show us how. If the Milankovitch cycles have been debunked, show us how.
Regardless, electric vehicles create more CO2. It is from the increased need to generate electricity.
Every now and then the Governor really disappoints….this is one of those times. The EV movement is a failure and I resent that my tax dollars are being used for these rebates. These vehicles are being pushed on the very people who can least afford them. Will there be incentives to help citizens with the outrageous costs to service them? Will the government be replacing the almost twenty thousand dollar batteries when they fail? These vehicles may have a place in the future but it is clear that the science behind them has not been perfected. I would much rather see that money being spent on the people who have had their homes and belongings destroyed for a third time. I keep hearing stories about how they have been ignored by FEMA and have had no help from the state for the last two floods let alone this last one. Why is that Governor if as you say “Me and my team are doing everything we can to give immediate relief to Vermonters as we continue to assess and respond to the needs,” I don’t think the good people of Barre or Waterbury would agree that you and your team have been very effective responding to their needs. You and your team need to get out of the office more and talk to people about their immediate needs… and I’m pretty sure they don’t include an EV.
I would rather see the Governor spend that money if need be on charging infrastructure and let the public decide without direct financial incentives which kind of vehicle to use. With our currently inadequate charging apparatus and already greater loads on our electrical grid due to mandates about home heating, it will be the owners of electric cars who will be doing the “pushing”…
It will be interesting to see how many Vermonters actually take advantage of the Governor’s below EV/flood offer…on the taxpayers’ nickel.
I hope any prospective applicants first check to see if they will need to upgrade their home electrical service (a large majority do not have a 200-amp service) for at least $2500-$3,000 to be able to do utilize the optimum EV battery charging for their new EV.
See the below link:
https://www.westphalec.com/residential-tips/do-i-need-to-upgrade-my-electric-service-for-my-electric-vehicle-charger/
“I from the government and I am here to help you”!
Dave Stahler, Sr.
Interesting that I first heard of this EV offer/promotion just hours after the grid sent out a warning that specifically asked you not to charge EVs due to grid overload.
Not sure, but there may be some message here.
What’s even more amazing is that the governor has had his own experience with how unworthy EVs are when his taxpayer paid Ford F150 Lightning couldn’t get him to appointments around the state while showcasing his poor judgement. After spending $60+ thousand where is that truck and why is he promoting these vehicles after he saw first-hand how limited and unreliable they are after that failure. Most of us do not have the luxury of having a state trooper follow us around in a normal gas driven cruiser in case the EV dies on the road. This is more over the top poor judgement. Someone or some organization must be behind this insane idea. It reminds me of the Safe and Effective gaslighting program, remember that?
What do you expect from a Biden puppet? Scott’s only doing what he’s been paid to do. Destroy Vermont.
Like BIDEN is has the capacity to control a puppet! He’s one himself, at this point.
You should let him know what you think at the Milton GOP BBQ Saturday. Ask him his reasons yourself.
Out of the over 60,000 public charging stations in America, only a little over 10,000 are DC fast charging that will “fill up’ your EV in about half an hour. The rest are level II that will take four to ten hours. That sucks if you’re traveling.
If you use your EV locally with a home charger that’s fine. Until the power company or the government tell you not to because of the strain on the power grid, or your car catches fire and burns your house down.
So, Scott and company really are under the assumption that everyone just naturally wants an electric piece of crap here in Vermont. And, that a coupon for a discount for an EV will not only fix their issue while furthering this stupid agenda but that the public will also feel grateful for this bone. OMG, am I the only one feeling insulted on behalf of these car owners? Am I the only one shaking their head knowing full well Vermonters will still be blindly voting for these idiots?
Didn’t he used to race gas powered cars? I wouldn’t let him drive my grandson’s go cart. And now he’s driving the state right into the ground.
A mere puppet doing exactly what a puppet is compensated to do – compromised, complicit, and dancing merrily upon our early graves – literally or figuratively – you decide.
A fascist by any other name… qui bono?
Why aren’t we insisting that, like race car drivers who wear the insignia/patches of their sponsors (who is paying them to race, subsidizing equipment and repair, etc), they wear the names of their masters in the daylight?
Excellent point! When will Thunder Road be mandated to race EVs only. I’ll wait.