Govt’s car strategy a quick fix for carbon
The Government really wants us to buy electric cars. That’s the takeaway from the funding announcements accompanying the release of the Government’s Emissions Reduction Plan (ERP).
In total, $569 million from the Government’s earnings from the Emissions Trading Scheme will go to helping low-income earners trade in their “dunger” for an EV or hybrid. The policy follows the rebates for new and second-hand EV purchases announced last year.
On the one hand, it’s a political correction, which the Government hopes will deflect criticism away from subsidising rich people to buy cars. It’s also a doubling down on their commitment to the EV strategy.
Encouraging the importing of electric vehicles is a hoped-for quick fix to our rising carbon emissions. There’s a rationale behind this strategy.
The most crucial point is that emissions produced from manufacturing an electric car or mining for the earth elements used in batteries don’t show up in New Zealand’s emissions budgets. Whereas the petrol we use does.
It’s hoped that by incentivising EVs, our emissions from transport will eventually turn downwards.
The Prime Minister talks about New Zealand’s green image, so important to primary producers, being at risk if we aren’t seen to be reducing emissions. A larger fleet of EVs will make the country’s emissions look a little better.
However, buying an EV, especially if a household continues to run two or more vehicles, won’t contribute a great deal to reducing the world’s carbon emissions. Not in the short term, which is the timeframe we’re now dealing with if we want to avoid the worst outcomes of global warming. Only giving up cars and driving much less will help.
The other ponderable from the Government’s announcement is the place of rail in our emissions reduction strategy. Is the focus on boosting the country’s EV fleet a tacit admission that we’ve left investment in rail too late?
Dreams of double-tracked electrified rail running the length of the country is fast starting to seem like a very distant utopia.
Having failed to invest adequately in rail in Auckland and most of the country for decades, any infrastructure spending now will not only be financially costly but in terms of emissions.
It’s calculated that the proposed light rail from downtown Auckland to the airport won’t be carbon neutral until after 2050. That’s because so much carbon will be emitted in its construction.
Labour says it’s committed to the project, though nothing is concretely under way. And with the passing of time, costs are only going to balloon. The National Party categorically says it won’t build it, and it could be leading the next Government.
If one infrastructure project might be in danger of falling out of favour, another could be on the ascendance. The EV strategy adds to speculation that building a giant hydro-battery at Lake Onslow is a real possibility.
The goal of increasing New Zealand’s EV fleet from 1 per cent of cars today to 30 per cent in 2035 will push up demand for electricity, even if we’re mostly charging off peak at night.
It’s theorised that a hydro-battery at Lake Onslow, combined with more solar and wind farms, would help keep a lid on electricity prices. And save us from having to burn coal to meet the country’s electricity needs, defeating the purpose of switching from petrol vehicles to electric ones.
Support for the Onslow hydrobattery, now subject to a feasibility study, could be a pre-election announcement from Labour. It remains to be seen whether National would follow them in this direction.
Even if building the Onslow Dam were fast-tracked, and electricity prices as a result didn’t skyrocket, I still have another doubt.
The biggest unknown for the EV strategy is whether the price of batteries will stay somewhere around the level they’re at now.
Are there enough earth elements extractable from the ground to run a worldwide fleet of electric cars? I don’t want to buy an EV and find that replacement batteries get more expensive due to scarcity, increasing mining costs, or conflict.
I’m under no illusion that buying an EV will do much to prevent global warming, but I’m interested in the cheapest option for driving my family.
Should our household take a punt on buying an EV because we’ll be paying, as Green Party co-leader James Shaw claims, the equivalent of 40c a litre of petrol to run it?
Looking at the prices for used EVs with a newish battery, purchasing one would be a major outlay even with a rebate. And to the price of the car, you need to add the cost of installing a charging station at home. It would take a lot of driving to recoup the outlay.
The Government is saying that buying an EV is the way to go. But with all the unknowns, is the Government just taking a punt also?