Forums

EVs as a major boost to the US economy

EVs as a major boost to the US economy

We are still importing about half of the oil used in this country, which means there is a huge money drain going on in every American community as the $80 fillups continue. As more EVs are in use that money will flow to our domestic electric utilities instead of leaving the country forever. The utilities in turn will use that money to build more domestic generation and a smarter grid. People will also have more money left in their pockets to spend.

I think this economic effect is more significant than the reduction in tailpipe emissions and certainly justifies the fairly mild tax rebates and incentives in place now.

Plus the best EVs in the world are now built right here, so jobs are another contributor.

bigd | February 2, 2014

@evpro
That would be great if it happened that way. "The utilities in turn will use that money to build more domestic generation and a smarter grid", However, past experience dictates that the utilities will not put the profits into upgrading the grid (just research TVA). Then leave it to the people to pay HIGH rates to offset the coast of upgrading.
Not saying your idea is not right on in theory, just saying that it isn't the reality of it :-)
Last, it still does not justify the high tax rebates. but lets not argue that point again lol

evpro | February 2, 2014

Well the consequences for power companies are that they will need to meet somewhat higher electric demand overall and higher than expected residential loads, particularly overnight, (which is lucky for them).

So it seems they will be forced to make some further investments to meet that demand (or it will crash their system). The most cost effective things they can do at this point are renewable energy sources and grid efficiency/demand management measures.

It is up to regulators to see that those investments are funded primarily by the increase in electricity sales and a more balanced load schedule, rather than just an increase in rates.

If that is enforced then I think the tax incentives are worthy as part of a national energy policy. The payoff being the recirculation of money within our communities rather than its direct export to unfriendly nations. The environmental and national security improvements are just the icing on the cake.

Dramsey | February 2, 2014

I think it would be more accurate to say that EVs may provide a major boost in the economy some day.

All of your points are correct: EVs use locally-produced energy and the money we pay for that goes to American companies. Still, without any numbers at all, it's premature to tout this as a "major" boost to the economy.

bigd | February 2, 2014

@evpro
Many ways we could get off foreign oil and keep "money within our communities rather than its direct export to unfriendly nations." Drill baby drill lol, then the people within the communities can invest in the renewable energy as they chose. Think of all the money Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, Oprah Winfrey, actors that talk about it and the legend himself Al Gore. They could be major investors. Then we could transfer over to the renewable energy and not involve the regulators (govt).We all know what we get when the govt gets involved, does Solyndra come to mind? I told u not going to debate the subsidies again lol.

Brian H | February 3, 2014

Another issue: the largest major "foreign" oil source is Canada. Much or most of the money spent there will cycle directly back into the US economy anyway.

bigd | February 3, 2014

@Brian H
You are obsolutley correct. I did interchange words as we discused unfriendly nations and foreign oil. I should have been more clear and stated get off oil from unfriendly nations.

Brian H | February 3, 2014

Who you calling obsolete? Or was that obsolute? That's absolutely unmeaningful.

bigd | February 3, 2014

was combining my words again --- was stating you were absolutely correct and you are obsolete lol kidding, you caught my error

nikolateslas88 | February 3, 2014

What will happen is americans will have the extra money to invest in themselves, wether it be energy self sufficientcy like solar or home improvements, or more money for the economy overal. Americans will have more money to spend on other things besides fuel.....its just like being taxed . Less taxed means more money for the middle class to spend and support the american economy.

just an allusion | February 3, 2014

@evpro; bigd; Dramsey

I can see something of that nature occurring as a matter of necessity, though it'll likely require a policy shift as well as a shift in perspective from that of the present day here-and-now to that of a more so future outlook.

@bigd

You'll have to watch out for Brian H as he's something of a grammar Nazi who, while they acknowledge that Tesla's are both being bought and sold to a number of foreign buyers, they apparently fail to recognize that not every Tesla owner/potential owner spiks engrish....

risingsun | February 3, 2014

When ev's become cheaper than ICE's, it will be a major boost the US economy. People will have more disposable income and their standard of living will be higher.

Brian H | February 3, 2014

allusion;
obsolutely untrue.

MarlonBrown | February 4, 2014

Potential to see a significant economy boost. I would say in 5 years.

- Likely battery advancement in the next 2-5 years. It seems Lithium-Sulfur or other could boost the performance of cars big time.

I am an Audi and BMW former fan and owner.

I drove the Model S and let's face it, all of sudden Audi and BMWs to me look like old luxury. If done right and at the right price, EVs are superior than ICE.

The day ICE cars are not feasible anymore, it will be a major shift and lot of new jobs created.

-

just an allusion | February 5, 2014

@MarlonBrown

Many would argue and agree that ICE's haven't been "feasible" for some time now given their environmental, biological, economical, political, cultural, and socioeconomic impact on our lives and the World upon which we live.

That is the perspective which Mr. Musk drew upon that spurred him to undertake the development and production of vehicles motivated by electrical propulsion.

Every day a great many others recognize this fact as well and even those in positions of authority acknowledge the repercussions of sustained ICE usage, yet it has proven hard to convince them to abandon them altogether because they, AFAIK, simply don't know how to do anything else other than what they've been doing all of this time (the "can't teach an old dog new tricks" syndrome).

And, because they've grown so accustomed to, literally, throwing money down a hole in search of an ever depleting finite resource (oil), they've tied so much of their very livelihoods up in the hunt, extraction, and refinement of it that such obviously wasteful, nihilistic behaviors have become second nature to them, reciprocally causing them to blinder their focus only on the here and now and see nothing of the road ahead, nothing of the future, nothing of any legacy whatsoever other than that of a pariah.

But, yes, it will be a great day when they finally manage to pull their collective heads out of the desperately pursued tar sands, shale, and other such last-resort oil deposits and draw a breath of fresh air for a change that is, irrefutably, for the better for all.

Timo | February 5, 2014

Lets not forget what the car is: a box with wheels to carry people and cargo around. As such ICE car works just well. BEV could not really beat it before li-ion batteries got small and cheap enough to build one rivaling ICE car as car.

We needed cars as cars even when they impact "environmental, biological, economical, political, cultural, and socioeconomic". Those impacts were necessary evil. People need to move around freely.

Model S is just plain better car. Forget about all the rest. That's why it is so great, it isn't "green" or "economical" or anything else, it is just a car made better.

just an allusion | February 5, 2014

@Timo

IMHO it wasn't the utilization of li-ion batteries that finally made EV's viable as any BEV would have been viable had its technology been properly configured from the start with evolution in battery technology serving to secured continued evolution of the technology through the ages.

True, transportation has always been a necessity of Life, be it in the form of a mule, horse, wagon, raft, boat, bicycle, scooter, car, plane, etc., etc., yet there has never been anything that precluded our ability to implement a form of transportation that didn't infringe upon the environment in some manner other than our own ingenuity, that is, until now when so much of the corporate, and reciprocally commuter, world has been conditioned to be dependent upon oil....

I'd argue that the Model S >IS< "green", but I don't want to get into a debate over semantics, so I'll just note that some aspect of the grid's coal/nuclear/NG/oil/wind produced energy goes into the Tesla's body and chassis fabrication processes, but that could change.

Now I would argue you on the point of the Model S's 'economy' because it is a proven and many times demonstrated fact that EV's are far more economical than ICE's, but that is proving itself out on its own.

Timo | February 5, 2014

Model S being green is side-effect, not the goal. That's the point. It could be a lot greener if your only goal would have been to make green car. BEV is just superior technology over ICE cars. Or should I say EV, B in that might change at some point to something else.

Batteries had not been developing until couple of last decades. It's material techs that had to reach certain advanced point before practical BEV became possible. GM EV1 was really first attempt to make such vehicle, but that was only small two-seater.

Only after li-ion batteries got good enough that real family car became possible. It could have been a bit sooner than Model S, but not much sooner.

Brian H | February 6, 2014

Timo;
True, dat. If the EV-1 had been sold at true cost + margin, it would have made a Lambo look cheap.