Government tightens Clean Car Discount rules as fund runs out of money

Public Policy / news

Most plugless hybrids and petrol cars to be dropped from government rebate scheme, while more utes face fees

2nd May 23, 5:00am by Dan Brunskill

Source: 123rf.com Copyright: macor

The government has changed which vehicles are eligible for its Clean Car Discount scheme and will only offer rebates to imports that emit less than 100 grams of carbon dioxide per kilometre.

A similar policy change was originally planned to take effect in 2025, but has been brought forward as the scheme—which was supposed to be cost neutral—was running out of funding.

The Clean Car Discount scheme offers a rebate to buyers of low-emissions cars, funded by imposing a fee on buyers of high-emission vehicles.

However, there have been more electric vehicles being bought than expected, so the fees and rebates are not balancing out.

Last month, Toyota NZ chief executive Neeraj Lala told media there had been a massive increase in the sales of battery electric vehicles, which were eligible for the highest rebates.

Meanwhile, less vehicles were being subjected to the fees supposedly funding the scheme.

“It doesn’t have enough money, it’s as simple as that. It’s not sustainable. We’re going to see some changes and they will be gift-wrapped in a package that will be a surprise,” he said.

As predicted, Transport Minister Michael Wood on Monday announced the eligibility criteria for the rebate would be lowered to include cars that emit less than 100 grams of CO2 per kilometre, down from 146 grams.

“The scheme is facilitating an increase in the number of EVs entering the fleet we did not expect until 2027. As planned we are further targeting the scheme to maintain its success, and ensure it will be self-funding until its next review,” he said in a statement.

This will likely mean that only battery electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids will be eligible, ruling out most plugless hybrids and pure petrol cars.

Rebates for zero emission used import vehicles will increase from $3,450 to $3,507 and the Crown will increase the scheme’s repayable grant by $100 million in Budget 2023.

Wood said the threshold for fees would also be lowered, from 192 grams of CO2 per kilometre to 150 grams, and the charges would increase. This is likely to hit more vehicles like utes.

The scheme was now forecast to reduce emissions by 3.4 million tonnes by 2035.

“That’s an additional 50% out to 2035 over and above what was forecast when it started. It will deliver twice the emissions reduction forecast between the start of the scheme and 2025,” he said.

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.

92 Comments

by chebbo | 2nd May 23, 6:46am 1682966819

Better start building more windmills.

by HSL | 2nd May 23, 7:11am 1682968278

Maybe it’s about politicians building their “legacy”. Don’t worry rolling blackouts coming to a city near you.

by Foxglove. | 2nd May 23, 7:29am 1682969369

Reportedly the scheme has been “too successful.” Again indicative of a government that struggles to comprehend what to do, how to do it, what it will do or even what they do do, has done.

by Pa1nter | 2nd May 23, 7:43am 1682970205

Some of their initiatives are under subscribed.

Some are over subscribed.

They're just throwing darts and hoping some will stick.

In fairness many of our great business minds are struggling to get decisions right in this day and age.

by Foxglove. | 2nd May 23, 7:50am 1682970652

Aye, recall the persistence & tenacity of Chloe of the Greens eventually revealed that Treasury were basing certain estimations & calculations on about where the dart landed. No fan of the Greens myself, but I do listen to her though.

by JimboJones | 2nd May 23, 4:05pm 1683000340

Biased somewhat? The scheme is much better than anything National ever did, isn't "too successful" better than "100% successful at doing nothing"?

by Foxglove. | 2nd May 23, 5:57pm 1683007073

Keep at it. As always ad nauseam, so long as there’s something to be parroted as being worse, then anything else sub par is justified.How to set a benchmark, not. Obviously, based on your unflinching partisanship , there should never have been anything else but Labour governments in New Zealand, ever since Mr Savage.

by chebbo | 2nd May 23, 7:19am 1682968768

Short term thinking is all our politicians are capable of, which is why nothing ever gets solved.

We invite tens of thousands of people to come live here without thinking about infrastructure. We spend billions on our zero-COVID strategy without thinking about the negative effects on our economy. And we encourage everyone to drive around in EVs without thinking about how we're all going to be charging them.

One cooler than usual evening in winter, and we're already getting rolling brownouts. Don't even think about lighting that fireplace, either.

by interesting1234 | 2nd May 23, 8:19am 1682972396

Lest we forget they are technically subsidising fossil fuel via the fuel tax removal temporarily. Grab your solar folks, you certainly can't rely on the system for too much longer. Woe betide the EV commuters who run out of juice halfway to work due to overnight blackouts preventing charging

by Lanthanide | 2nd May 23, 8:27am 1682972864

Why would you think there'd be overnight blackouts, the time when electricity consumption is lowest?

Also very few people with EVs must charge their car every single night in order to meet their daily commute requirements.

Really the problem to worry about is fuel shortages, since all of that is imported to NZ. Electricity is actually made here.

by chebbo | 2nd May 23, 9:36am 1682976995

Why would you think there'd be overnight blackouts, the time when electricity consumption is lowest?

Except if that's when everyone is charging their EVs, it won't be the time when electricity consumption is lowest.

by Lanthanide | 2nd May 23, 12:14pm 1682986490

That's why we're a market economy that relies on price signals to drive the public's behaviour, rather than a command and control economy.

People will charge their cars when the price is lowest. If that ceases to be the night, then people will shift charging their cars to during the day, in many cases likely from solar panels on their roofs.

by kiwikidsnz | 2nd May 23, 12:34pm 1682987690

"...in many cases likely from solar panels..." Only approx 2% of NZ houses have solar, vs around a third in Oz where its sunny (& only 4% in the UK).

Unlikely.

by kiwimm | 2nd May 23, 1:09pm 1682989756

The overlap between solar and EV ownership is high. It's also sunnier here than the UK so we should be able to have a higher % uptake than they do

by Lanthanide | 2nd May 23, 6:49pm 1683010185

We're talking about a hypothetical future in which there are so many EVs on the road it is no longer cheap to charge EVs at night. Talking about current installations of solar panels is not that relevant.

by kiwikidsnz | 2nd May 23, 8:00pm 1683014427

Hypothetically, fewer people will be charging their vehicles off their home solar during the day because thats when they use them.

by Speedmax | 2nd May 23, 9:45pm 1683020707

Talking about solar panels is entirely relevant, especially as soon EV charging will be bidirectional so car can function as battery for house.

by Noncents | 2nd May 23, 12:53pm 1682988817

No they wont. I have debated this many times before.

Human psychology and history says most people will plug their cars in when they get home. Most will either not look/care about pricing (after all it is still significantly cheaper than fuel), refuse to pay for timers, or simply not understand/care how to delay charging.

Annecdotal evidence is already supporting this, and I am sure when/if official studies/info comes out they will show the same trend - with a small outlier of early adopters who are naturally more consious of such things.

The one mitigating factor is that many simply wont be able to plug in as they can't access a suitable power point. A drive round any suburb in NZ will show why this is an issue in itself and likely to stifle the adaption of fully EV cars for a long time yet.

by kiwimm | 2nd May 23, 1:02pm 1682989335

I only plug in when needed (about once per week) and the car's timer is set to charge between 11pm and 7am when electricity is cheapest.

Also coming soon is demand-shifted charging. Octopus just launched their version Intelligent Octopus | Octopus Energy NZ and other power companies are working on it too. This allows you to plug in when you get home and set the % charge you need in the morning and the software will manage the charging at the cheapest time. They even pay you to do this.

by Uninterested | 2nd May 23, 1:10pm 1682989854

Yeah but wholesale prices go up down all around. So I am guessing that the software would use a simplification of the typical pricing during the night. With a profit margin.

by kiwimm | 2nd May 23, 1:14pm 1682990081

No, it uses the 24h wholesale price forecast to plan your charging. This data is freely available via the WITS API

by Noncents | 2nd May 23, 1:17pm 1682990245

As I said, the early adopters will show a slight difference in usage. But if/when the bulk transition, I doubt that will be the case.

by Hamish | 2nd May 23, 1:50pm 1682992245

I read that in the UK the number of public charging stations per EV has been dropping continuously for a while. As in there are more EVs fighting for a small number of charging stations.

by Speedmax | 2nd May 23, 9:48pm 1683020891

I drove a fair bit round UK in EV last year and never had to queue. There seems to be a lot of negative misinformation out there, much coming from people who haven’t tried and don’t know….

by Baywatch | 2nd May 23, 4:03pm 1683000234

Yes I plug in mine when I get home and the timer kicks on at 11.30pm and clicks off at 5.30pm (cheap pricing). The timer comes in the car so set and forget - why you think the majority of people are incapable of this one time job baffles me?

by JimboJones | 2nd May 23, 4:09pm 1683000578

Me hate change, change must be bad, it can't possibly work, etc...

by Belle | 2nd May 23, 5:07pm 1683004029

Got any idea how much solar is needed to charge a car? A lot apparently. And dont even think about storing that solar, then charging car battery from house batteries. I thought that was possible and got sent home in disgrace from here.

by Speedmax | 2nd May 23, 9:41pm 1683020460

Add solar to the house and do some daytime charging. Anyone who’s tried it understands it’s a great solution

by KH | 2nd May 23, 8:35am 1682973305

Fear not. For the first four months this year my solar house bought 327kw in the gate and sent 2200kw out. And that doesn't count what we produced and used directly. So we are doing our bit for the nation.

by Zwifter | 2nd May 23, 9:37am 1682977028

All well and good if you can fork out the up front costs of the system, however for a single person in an energy efficient modern house the payback isn't there. This summer has also been a disaster for solar in Auckland and most other places so if this is set to continue or even get worse then it going to be a problem.

by KH | 2nd May 23, 11:35am 1682984149

Instead of spending $16 Billion plus plus at Onslow they could buy you and a few others a rooftop solar. You too can help the nation.

As for Auckland. Fully agree.

by Lanthanide | 2nd May 23, 12:16pm 1682986561

High penetrations of rooftop solar is not that easy. The grid was never designed to have distributed production like that. Once you get above about 15% penetration, grid upgrades are required.

by Noncents | 2nd May 23, 1:22pm 1682990527

Yes, I believe some retailers already charge higher lines rates to solar customers to "cover" this.

by solardb | 2nd May 23, 1:46pm 1682991987

yes , but those grid upgrades can make it smarter , and are probably needed anyway.

Its not like there's not problems already , with phase imbalance , voltage drop , power factor, etc.

At a local transformer level, a neighbourhood could be rewarded for load sharing , solar and battery backup . Those that agree can have power savings in exchange for smart control of thier demand.

by Speedmax | 2nd May 23, 9:56pm 1683021398

Grid upgrades will of course be required. A continuous process, as has been the case since invention of electricity. But that’s not a reason not to do it. There’s far more to be saved by encouraging high uptake of domestic solar and doing necessary grid upgrades than building new power stations to support increasing power demand

by redcows1 | 2nd May 23, 12:55pm 1682988953

The comparison is way off. Solar is a generator of power. Onslow is a battery nothing more.

by Uninterested | 2nd May 23, 1:15pm 1682990102

Yep. People cannot seem to understand that it requires generation from other stations to fill it up. Over and above what would have been generated. Because it doesn't rain much at Onslow. So additional generation would be required as well as Onslow. Very very expensive....

by profile | 2nd May 23, 2:34pm 1682994871

Constant generation to replace the evaporation in the driest part of NZ.

"A recent Infrastructure Commission technical paper concluded that the proposed Lake Onslow pumped hydro scheme can’t provide New Zealand with a cost advantage until 2037.

It also found that any advantage it does provide won’t be long-lasting “unless the cost to build it is substantially below $10 billion”.

That was before Energy and Resources Minister Megan Woods announced via a Cabinet paper that the P50 cost estimate – a mid-range probability – for Onslow would be $15.9 billion."

"Long-term battery storage without over-build of wind & solar $28,000 million Source: Culy (2019b)"

by kiwimm | 2nd May 23, 1:13pm 1682989983

I have a Passive House (the most energy efficient housing standard) and the return from my solar system has been spectacular. At current buyback rates if 17c/kWh it should be a no-brainer if you have some money to invest - you'll get multiple times the return of term deposits and tax free.

by Uninterested | 2nd May 23, 1:16pm 1682990207

David Parkers' ears pick up....

by Noncents | 2nd May 23, 1:20pm 1682990429

As do TOP. Any chance to hypothetically impute a cost as real is their bread and butter.

by Casual Observer | 2nd May 23, 9:35pm 1683020142

kiwimn - to you have a 3phase power connection? The highest we can get around here (rural single phase line) is 10c/kwh for power sent to grid.

by KBKIWI | 2nd May 23, 8:29am 1682972981

Absolutely - more windmills, more solar farms, more hydro, more geothermal, and start battery storage as well. Every dollar we spend less exporting to pay for foreign petrol that instead goes into purchasing locally produced electricity is fantastic for New Zealand (leaves us much less exposed to foreign sourced energy price shocks, and security of supply is all local and of course is much better for our national trade deficit).

by Advisor | 2nd May 23, 10:50am 1682981438

purchasing locally produced electricity

We will undoubtedly rely quite heavily on foreign capital, skills and equipment to build and operate those solar, battery and wind farms, charging stations, and our electrical infrastructure (grid, distribution, etc.). We can expect the majority of dollars spent on electrifying NZ to end up elsewhere, propping up our current account deficit even further, at least in the short to medium term.

Would've been nice to spend some money over the last decade on clean tech R&D and workforce development instead of buying houses from one another for ever-increasing prices and importing lower skilled workers.

by Larry76 | 2nd May 23, 12:36pm 1682987793

More windmills - why? Do we need to grind more wheat?

by Baywatch | 2nd May 23, 4:00pm 1683000021

You need more bread?

by Chris-M | 2nd May 23, 4:10pm 1683000620

Good idea, and you should add solar panels. Unfortunately they cannot get out of their own way and achieve any thing, so they will just end up burning more coal and emit more CO2 as a result. Given their lack of achievement at decarbonising the power sector they would achieve something positive by removing the subsidy for EVs and increasing it for hybrids which make a real and immediate contribution.

If I were running a subsidy for EVs scheme it would be tied to cash that can only be spent on fitting solar power to homes. That way the user has some chance of using renewable power for their transport and not coal at Huntly. Why is every public building in the country not fitted with solar panels? How about making solar power installs on company buildings tax deductible? How many thousands of acres of north facing roofs do we have, where solar could be fitted instead of covering good farmland with them? (Isn't interesting that it is economic for private companies that trade within the power sector to do this) Could it all be something to do with appeasing the vested interested lobbyists from the power companies?

by Pa1nter | 2nd May 23, 6:50am 1682967018

Remember, no new taxes.

These are fines.

by Pragmatist | 2nd May 23, 9:44am 1682977454

They also aren't new...

by JimboJones | 2nd May 23, 4:12pm 1683000736

They are also revenue neutral.

by kiwikidsnz | 2nd May 23, 8:37am 1682973454

Still no word on when EVs will pay RUCS for the roads they drive on ?

by Podcast | 2nd May 23, 8:50am 1682974256

Shh don't alert David Parker! I've saved around $10k over the last 7 years by not paying any road users on my EV. If Parker finds out about this he may want to call it unearned income and tax me on it!

by CrispyKahawai | 2nd May 23, 9:57am 1682978236

Thanks for the laugh.

by Pragmatist | 2nd May 23, 9:45am 1682977557

the exemption expiry date had been known for years, please catch up. 1/4/2024.

by Baywatch | 2nd May 23, 4:05pm 1683000321

How's that Fuel rebate going..? I see ques all ready next month and the ganshing of teeth.

by blobbles | 2nd May 23, 9:12am 1682975526

This is a great initiative by the government, pushing us away from fossil fuels and also toward energy independence and which will also have a huge effect on our balance of trade deficits as well as lower our GHG emissions. Lets give credit where it is due. Yes, we will need to build more generation and it's coming online as well with a number of windfarms under development as well as geothermal. Of particular note is Genesis asking for an extension to the Castle Hill wind farm, albeit for less turbines adding the potential for scale up later, and the discussion around off shore turbines too. Add in Onslow to the mix and we might be setting ourselves up well for the future.

by kiwikidsnz | 2nd May 23, 9:31am 1682976715

Onslow is virtue signalling white elephant inefficiency. Far better to run Manapouri transmission to the NI & boot RioTinto out for a fraction of their ongoing power, operational & ETS subsidies.

by Larry76 | 2nd May 23, 12:35pm 1682987759

Why kick out the smelter? The dam was built to supply it and it’s one of the few high skilled, heavy industry export earners we have left.

by kiwikidsnz | 2nd May 23, 4:27pm 1683001638

Last time I looked (a couple years ago during their last brinkmanship rort of Meridien & the NZ taxpayer), their total annual subsidies cost more than all those $100k pa jobs - & probably also the bulk of any NZ company tax paid by RioTinto who capture the bulk of the export earnings.

A comparison is the previous Australian car assembly industry which prior to closure was reported to cost the Australian taxpayer $50k per vehicle..

by Speedmax | 2nd May 23, 10:16pm 1683022604

Because they have heavily subsidised power and contribute very little to the country. The power could be far better used (via transmission upgrades) elsewhere in the country, eg powering EVs instead of relying on imported petrol, and saving GHG emissions and cost of offsets. Or producing green hydrogen.

by Pragmatist | 2nd May 23, 9:47am 1682977675

Onslow is still looking like a $16b boondoggle that wouldn't be needed if we hadn't sold our hydro generators and had instead retained control.

by Grattaway | 2nd May 23, 11:25am 1682983532

We have retained control as Govt can legislate -and also has (sorry had) the money in the bank which could have been used for new geothermal generation but has been squandered on trinkets and now EV owners

by kiwimm | 2nd May 23, 1:25pm 1682990721

Do you understand how a feebate system works?

by Pragmatist | 2nd May 23, 10:44pm 1683024258

Good luck with the govt legislating and effectively controlling the day to day operations of the Generators without ending up in court for years.

by Grattaway | 2nd May 23, 11:22am 1682983356

Its a great initiative if you believe that taking money from poor people who cannot afford Ev's and giving it rich people who already can is a good idea

I have a new quote ' A fool and the taxpayers money is soon parted"

by blobbles | 2nd May 23, 12:06pm 1682985977

You must be referring to the tax report that came out the other day?

by Larry76 | 2nd May 23, 12:39pm 1682987991

Fixed that for you -

“Its a great initiative if you believe that taking money from wannabe Ute drivers who can afford $80k Ranger Raptors and giving it to people who want an efficient vehicle is a good idea”

Let’s exempt farmers and fine everyone else, who are mostly company vehicles and urban warriors.

by kiwimm | 2nd May 23, 1:31pm 1682991089

Ranger Raptor is $92,900. It was also outsold 124 to 49 by the $100,900 Tesla Model Y Performance (which does not get a rebate) last month.

by Pragmatist | 2nd May 23, 10:41pm 1683024102

Single month statistics are misleading, shipments are sporadic, need to look at the numbers over a much longer period. 220 Raptors YTD vs 132 Mod Y Perf.

by Speedmax | 2nd May 23, 10:18pm 1683022731

Spot on Larry

by Speedmax | 2nd May 23, 10:11pm 1683022303

This announcement simply highlights that the scheme is working better than expected and can now be adjusted to achieve even better results. The ute crowd will moan but NZ is infested with utes that most of their owners don’t need. I’ll put my tin hat on now…

by Pragmatist | 2nd May 23, 9:42am 1682977340

Good to see the entirely predictable comments by those that inhaled far too much leaded petrol exhaust fumes. I had hoped for better, but nope.

by chebbo | 2nd May 23, 10:37am 1682980639

And a predictable ad hominem retort from someone who has obviously bought in to the hype.

It takes a very narrow mind to think that doubting EVs are the solution to anything means you must be pro fossil fuels.

by Larry76 | 2nd May 23, 12:42pm 1682988152

And yet you insist on making the perfect the enemy of the good. EVs are simply better, get over it.

The scheme is intended to accelerate EV adoption and create a vibrant used EV car market for said ‘poor people’, who were never going to buy a new $50k vehicle to begin with.

by chebbo | 2nd May 23, 1:20pm 1682990426

There's no point in debating "perfect" vs "good" if neither one is a solution to the problems we are trying to solve.

by kiwikidsnz | 2nd May 23, 7:53pm 1683014033

Speaking of the perfect being the enemy of the good: several studies have shown that on a life cycle basis EVS do not surpass ICEs in lower climate emissions until at least 100000kms/8yrs. At which point the vehicle has depreciated below the cost of the replacement battery which regenerates more than half the climate emissions.

I'm aware that these studies are global (as are climate emissions, NZs contribution being <0.2%) & therefore electricity generation technologies are a component factor.

by GV 27 | 2nd May 23, 8:38pm 1683016709

That number was 60,000km years ago based on not-particular green manufacturing and shitty cell densities. Both have improved since. And don't mistake the warranty period for the time a battery is usable, it's commonly an 80% capacity metric - as in your 500km range EV will only go 400km off a full charge. You don't have to throw it away at that point, it's just not as good as it was when it was new. And even then there are some electrolytes which will repair batteries if they are charged in a certain way or cycled at a certain heat. In which case, you'd have close to no wear at all. Meanwhile, my high performance hatch has been through three fuel pumps, badly needs a walnut blast and probably needs the catalytic converter replacing, at just over 100,000km. I think the EV is probably winning this one, eh.

by Pragmatist | 2nd May 23, 10:55pm 1683024958

Aww, poor chebbo, looks like I hit a nerve. EVs are great solution to suburban air quality, and a good move towards energy independence. A shit ton of advantages over dirty fossil fuel cars, both environmentally and convenience for the drivers. It’s not hype, it’s reality. You should try it sometime..

since there is no way this country will ever build a comprehensive functional public transport network in my lifetime, I don’t see any better options on the horizon.

by nktokyo | 2nd May 23, 11:28am 1682983725

Good to see EVs are becoming mainstream. Of all the things Labour has poured money into this actually has long term benefits.

by profile | 2nd May 23, 1:18pm 1682990293

Are we going to get the tradies and farmers to pay for landfilling the batteries too? Or do we get the Congo kids on to it?

"Unfortunately there are currently no facilities in New Zealand for recycling electric vehicle batteries. This means they must be exported to a special facility in Australia, which involves different types of transport, lots of paperwork and a substantial cost for each battery."

https://www.cartakeback.co.nz/blog/in-the-know/recycling-electric-and-h…

"Currently, lithium-ion batteries in Australia need to be shipped offshore in order to be melted down and recycled. There are logistical constraints with this process along with financial and economic concerns to consider, as well as regulatory barriers between nations."

https://www.cartakeback.co.nz/blog/in-the-know/recycling-electric-and-h…

"Hence the elite state-mandated battery recycling companies only get a small slice of the battery recycling pie, and the vast majority of batteries disappear into an uncontrollable and untraceable growing miasma of thousands of companies. On June 23, a domestic newspaper searched for “power battery recycling” companies on the business database Qichacha 企查查 and found 57,244 results for related companies. A month later, on July 27, the same search returned a total of 62,157 entries.

Most of these companies are small workshops with little if any investment in safety and environmental protection. In addition, a complete set of industry standards for battery recycling is still lacking in China."

https://thechinaproject.com/2022/07/28/chinas-first-generation-electric…

"Storing the Battery

Once a battery has been removed from the car, to minimise the risk of it getting damaged and potentially catching fire, injuring someone through electric shock or causing breathing difficulties through leaking chemicals, it must be very carefully handled and stored. This means any facility storing these batteries must have plenty of well-ventilated space, away from other materials such as scrap cars, fuels, tyres etc. and the batteries must not be piled on top of each other.

Transporting the Battery

Because of the chemicals used inside an electric or hybrid vehicle battery, once removed from the car these must be very carefully packaged and transported to make sure there is no risk of electric shock, fire or explosion to those involved in transporting them. This sometimes involves using very expensive boxes and packaging and means that the right trucks must be used with extra safety precautions in place and properly trained drivers."

https://www.cartakeback.co.nz/blog/in-the-know/recycling-electric-and-h…

by kiwimm | 2nd May 23, 1:38pm 1682991539

You need batteries to fail before you build the recycllng facilities. Or should we invest into a plant now to sit idle while we wait? There is a long lag between cars being sold and batteries needing recycling. But they will come once the demand is there.

by profile | 2nd May 23, 2:33pm 1682994781

Who pays? Recycling a cobalt free battery is never going to cover the costs. It's easy being virtue signal green.

"Both processes produce extensive waste and emit greenhouse gases, studies have found. And the business model can be shaky: Most operations depend on selling recovered cobalt to stay in business, but battery makers are trying to shift away from that relatively expensive metal. If that happens, recyclers could be left trying to sell piles of “dirt,” says materials scientist Rebecca Ciez of Purdue University.

...Recycling researchers, meanwhile, say effective battery recycling will require more than just technological advances. The high cost of transporting combustible items long distances or across borders can discourage recycling. As a result, placing recycling centers in the right places could have a “massive impact,” Harper says. “But there’s going to be a real challenge in systems integration and bringing all these different bits of research together.”

https://www.science.org/content/article/millions-electric-cars-are-comi…

by Uninterested | 2nd May 23, 1:26pm 1682990808

But alongside this we still have all those clapped out diesel spewing Nissan Safaris and the like which Helen Clark allowed to be imported.

Which unfortunately seem to be invincible. And obviously the wof places don't follow the rules on particulate emissions.

by Speedmax | 2nd May 23, 10:31pm 1683023476

…and they didn’t even pour money in. It’s capital has run out because it was more successful at changing buyer behaviour than expected, which will be addressed by the new settings that will drive further behaviour change and make the scheme closer to revenue neutral. Actually very good policy.

by nigelh | 2nd May 23, 11:11pm 1683025863

I'd love to see the stats on how many of those were Teslas vs say any other EV, hybrid etc before the reset. My guess is at least 50% Teslas by value.

by Peter M | 2nd May 23, 4:04pm 1683000250

And still....the 3.4 million ton CO2 reduction is dwarfed by the 9 million ton of CO2 reduction if they had stick to the biofuel mandate. Yes petrol would be a bit more expansive but we would not punish Utes and vans beforehand. In other words if we would choose to drive a ICE vehicle we would pay for it as our own choice.

by Belle | 2nd May 23, 5:43pm 1683006188

Is that the same biofuel they make from crops they have to sow and harvest using diesel tractors?

by chebbo | 2nd May 23, 6:07pm 1683007655

Not like solar panels and wind turbines, which are made entirely without the use of fossil fuels.

by GV 27 | 2nd May 23, 8:40pm 1683016843

Nothing wrong with biofuels for emissions reduction for people to choose to use. Everything wrong with making it impossible to sell fuel without biofuel blend if people want to buy petrol. Signed, every car enthusiast in the country.

by nickp | 3rd May 23, 7:45am 1683056718

A Tesla 3 has a 50kwh battery. Our electricity network is burning coal to generate electricity for any additional load. As the electric cars are new to the grid the electricity the use will be burning coal.

Based on GPT calculations, 45kg of coal will be burnt producing 128kg of CO2 for every full recharge.

≈============

To generate 50 kW of electricity for one hour.

Next, using the estimate that a coal-fired power plant requires about 0.9 kg of coal to generate 1 kWh of electricity, the amount of coal required to generate 50 kWh of electricity would be:

50 kWh x 0.9 kg/kWh = 45 kg

Therefore, approximately 45 kg of coal would be required to generate 50 kW of electricity for one hour.

Finally, using the estimate that the combustion of 1 kg of coal produces about 2.86 kg of CO2, the amount of CO2 produced by the combustion of 45 kg of coal would be:

45 kg x 2.86 kg CO2/kg coal = 128.7 kg CO2

Therefore, approximately 128.7 kg of CO2 would be produced by the combustion of 45 kg of coal to generate 50 kW of electricity for one hour.

by solardb | 3rd May 23, 8:11am 1683058268

Only 10 % of our electricity comes from coal, and since the rebate scheme started, our use of coal has fallen.

by blobbles | 3rd May 23, 8:56am 1683060999

In what fantastical world are we burning coal in NZ to charge cars?