Latest news with #EVowners
News.com.au
5 days ago
- Automotive
- News.com.au
Aussies explode over Albo's latest cash grab
Earlier this week, we published a story about the Federal Government's intention to introduce a road user charge (RUC) for electric vehicle (EV) owners. A per-kilometre tax to replace the fuel excise revenue lost as more Australians switch to electric vehicles. The proposal encouraged more than 2000 readers to comment. What followed was a passionate public policy debate, part stand-up comedy and a masterclass in Australian scepticism. While the conversation is divided, a large majority of readers believe EV drivers should contribute to road maintenance. But many also say the policy must be fair, transparent and apply equally across all vehicle types. 'Tax the trucks, not the Teslas,' one reader wrote, summing up a sentiment that hundreds of readers agreed with. Another, HelpMeOverHere, accused the government of double standards: 'A mining truck the size of a suburban street guzzles thousands of litres a week and gets all the fuel tax refunded.' The 'free ride' is over Many of our readers argue it's simply time for EV owners to pay their way. They believe that EV owners are currently getting a 'free ride' by avoiding the fuel excise, which raises more than $15 billion annually. 'There is not one solitary argument that supports the notion that EV drivers should be able to use the roads and not contribute to their upkeep. Not one,' nonedeplume said. Stephen argued: 'EV manufacturers are upset that the free ride is coming to an end and the EV drivers will have to pay to use the road like everyone else.' But others saw it less as fairness, more as the government's latest 'gotcha' tax. 'It's always the proletariat that has to pay for incompetent government,' Walker Texas Ranger said. 'Just another tax to prevent us from moving up in the world.' Some readers proposed replacing the fuel excise entirely with a universal RUC. 'Why don't we scrap the fuel excise and then just apply a RUC to all road users - that would then be fair to ALL road users regardless of what type of fuel (petrol, diesel, EV, hybrid),' Gaynor said. The trucking elephant in the room A big chunk of outrage was over Australia's heavy freight industry. Many said heavy vehicles are the 'culprits' and should pay more, given their impact on infrastructure. Fair enough. Infrastructure Australia data shows that one five-axle truck causes the same road wear as 2900 cars. The actual ratio varies depending on factors like axle weight and road construction, but a truck's damage is often cited as being much higher than 2900. Currently, heavy vehicles pay a RUC of 32.4 cents per litre, set to rise 6 per cent annually until 2025-2026. They also pay the federal fuel excise, now around 51-52 cents per litre - but operators can claim back the difference through fuel tax credits, reducing their net cost by about 20 cents per litre. 'Trucks are the issue,' Grande_choice said. 'All those regional roads are getting slammed by trucks but not EVs.' Rural drivers fear being slugged harder Polestar Australia's managing director Scott Maynard said a one-size-fits-all approach could unfairly hit regional drivers who travel long distances for essential services. According to Australians tend to drive longer distances for essentials and often live further out because property is more affordable. 'People in regional areas generally are poorer and drive more distances to get from A to B,' BobtheBuilder said. 'Hence why the CEO (Scott Maynard) makes the point that they will be discriminated against.' Reader Vicki agreed: 'I'm rural and 75km from my nearest town, doctor, supermarket…city EV owners with public transport will cost them nothing, and rural/regional drivers big money. When the policy debate turned into a comedy set In between the policy arguments came some memorable one-liners that had me chuckling hard. 'If it can't be eaten or plucked, it will be taxed.' 'The word of the day is fungible.' 'I'm just going to wait until a hamster-powered car comes out.' 'How about we bring in a tax on breathing?' The green glow-up….or greenwash? Some readers went straight for the environmental jugular. 'It's time the idealists wake up to the fact that electric cars aren't better for the environment…they will never pay off the carbon footprint cost of making the batteries,' Mark wrote. But Adam added, 'battery disposal facilities are already at 90+ per cent recyclability…the 'cut even' point for emissions is approx 37,000km.' Trusting the government…like trusting a cheating ex Underlying much of the conversation was the distrust of the government. Even commenters who back the idea of EVs paying said they didn't trust Canberra to use the money for roads. 'For FY23-24 the fuel excise raised $15b while [the] government only spent $10bn on roads,' Bryn wrote. 'When is it enough?' 'It's just revenue raising,' Jeff said. 'Once they have you hooked, they tax you.' The road ahead So the consensus? Most readers agree that EV drivers should pay and contribute. But it's simple, they want it to be fair. If the government can deliver that, they might just win people over. But if not, they'll be left with a few angry Australians.
Yahoo
09-08-2025
- Automotive
- Yahoo
Tesla owner stunned after witnessing shocking act in broad daylight: 'Can't believe he actually did it in front of me'
A shocked Tesla Model 3 owner turned to Reddit after their electric vehicle's tire was slashed in plain sight. "Can't believe he actually did it in front of me too," wrote the owner in the post to r/TeslaModel3. After the slashing, the vehicle needed to be towed, as the OP showcased in a series of photos, one of which displayed the flip-flop-wearing vandal heading toward the car with a knife. An uptick in vandalism against electric vehicle infrastructure and Teslas has been persistent across the globe. Vandals have destroyed charging stations, keyed cars, and thrown rocks at Teslas. This has been partly attributed to a reaction against Tesla's CEO, Elon Musk, whose role in U.S. politics has not been well received. Fear of vandalism is potentially one reason for a downturn in Tesla purchases in the second quarter of 2025, with a 13.5% decrease in sales compared to the same period last year. The emotional and financial tolls these incidents place on the owners of the damaged vehicles are obviously concerning. However, the onslaught of vandalism could also discourage those interested in transitioning to electric vehicles from making the switch, setting back the move to clean, sustainable transportation methods that reduce polluting emissions. Gasoline and diesel-powered cars produce particulate matter, nitrogen oxides, and carbon dioxide, contributing to harsh air pollution, harming air quality, and hurting everything from agriculture to human health. Those who decide against the transition have further missed out on the money-saving potential of electric vehicles that comes from a reduction in gas and maintenance costs. Anti-EV sentiment is also pervasive. Discourse over the production of energy sources and the pollution that comes from mining has caused misinformation about whether EVs are truly better for the environment. Do you think Tesla can bounce back from its recent struggles? Yes It depends on Elon's actions I don't think it's struggling Nope Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. Experts have debunked these claims, stating that EVs are ultimately better for the environment as production of fossil fuels dwarfs the environmental impact of EVs. Redditors were appalled by the vandalism. "The hate for electric vehicles is real," wrote one. Join our free newsletter for easy tips to save more and waste less, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet. Solve the daily Crossword
ABC News
20-07-2025
- Automotive
- ABC News
WA's RAC electric-highway charging project ends despite rise in EVs
When West Australian car insurer RAC first launched its "electric highway" installing electric vehicle chargers in WA's south-west, it was the first network of its kind in Australia and opened regional travel to EV owners for the first time. Not that there were many of them. RAC general manager of external relations Will Golsby said there were about 80 electric cars in the state in 2015, when the highway first opened. In surveys the RAC conducted 10 years ago, people were interested in EVs, but the number one concern was "range anxiety", the fear that the vehicles would be unusable outside of Perth because there was nowhere to charge them. "The original intent of the electric highways was really to open Western Australia up and enable people from Perth to travel through the south-west and allow our regional members with electric vehicles to travel to Perth," Mr Golsby told Gary Adshead on ABC Radio Perth. In 10 years, the number of fully electric vehicles in WA has grown to about 27,000, and there are about 150 charging stations across the state. The state government has spent more than $43 million on subsidies to help people buy electric vehicles and committed $21 million to extending the charging network. Mr Golsby said that, having demonstrated that owning an electric vehicle was a viable option in WA, the RAC had decided to move on, withdrawing from its involvement in the electric highway. "We wanted to open up the state to EVs," he said. "We believe there's been significant growth. We hope there will be more growth in electric vehicles." For Australian Electric Vehicle Association (AEVA) president Chris Jones, it is the end of an era in the evolution of electric transport in WA. It was Dr Jones, along with two others, who first pitched the idea of building the charging network to the RAC 10 years ago. "It started because I was unemployed and looking for something to do. I wrote a 10-page document on how you would build charging in the south-west," Dr Jones said. "We found the ideal spots and what the layout would look like, and we pitched it to anyone that would listen." Many potential funders and government agencies said no, but the RAC took the idea seriously. "They came back and said: 'You know what, this is absolutely something we should be supporting', and they did," Dr Jones said. Dr Jones said he was not surprised the highway project had now come to an end. The RAC purchased and installed electric-highway charging stations, but they were then owned and managed by local governments. "Councils weren't prepared for what it took to look after this sort of equipment," Dr Jones said. "You have to learn new skills, get familiar with new technology. You don't make much money from it." Some of those stations will continue to operate on the Chargefox network, while others will close down. In the popular south-west holiday spots of Busselton and Dunsborough, the council has decided not to continue running the charging stations. City of Busselton Mayor Phill Cronin acknowledged the charging station in Dunsborough was popular. "I don't think there's one time I've walked past and they're not being utilised," Cr Cronin said. However, he said the council had decided the charging station was not in a great location and the technology was becoming outdated. "It's just not something we feel that we should be taking on," he said, adding that a local shopping centre in Dunsborough had installed four fast charging stations in its car park, providing drivers with other options. In the case of the Busselton charging station, the council is inviting expressions of interest from businesses who would like to take over the charger. While it is the end of an era for electric driving in WA, the RAC said it had achieved what it set out to do. "It was Australia's first. Other states now claim to have the bigger, larger, longer, wider highways, but certainly this was Australia's first," Mr Golsby said. For AEVA, it was a major boost to its lobbying efforts in WA. "Buoyed by [the electric highway], we put the effort into lobbying the WA government into building a decent charging network around the state," Dr Jones said. "I think the next effort we will need to see in public charging will be workplace charging."
The Independent
26-06-2025
- Automotive
- The Independent
Energy price cap scrap would save households hundreds, analysis finds
Households could be saving £200 a year with 'fairer' energy pricing, experts say, as they call for the Ofgem price cap to be phased out. A flexible system of energy pricing would reduce the price of electricity by 4p/kWh over the next 15 years, a new report from The Resolution Foundation finds. A key measure under this system would include 'locational pricing', where households pay for energy according to costs in their area. This could reduce system costs by £3.7 billion a year, the report says, equivalent to £40 per household. The most savings could be made from introducing more time-of-use tariffs, where households can pay cheaper energy rates depending on the time of day it is used. This would save an average of £160 per household by 2040 according to the report. This measure would particularly benefit electric vehicle (EV) owners, researchers say, with an average £120 saving a year to be had compared to the price cap. This is because most EV owners will charge their vehicles overnight, when electricity would be cheaper. EVs are rising in popularity in the UK, accounting for 19 per cent of all car sales in 2024. This is expected to increase quickly in the coming years as a ban on the sale of new petrol and diesel cars comes into force in 2030. This demand is so great that EVs, alongside electric heating, are set to be the main drivers behind a 40 per cent increase in residential electricity use by 2035. But this flexible electricity model could also come with higher price risks for households, as they would be more directly subject to volatility in the electricity market. A report for Octopus Energy by FTI in February investigated how locational – or zonal – pricing could impact household energy costs across the country. Their analysis found that average zonal wholesale prices in the north are lower than in the south, with those in London facing bills nearly seven times higher than those in Scotland if bills were mapped directly to zone-based wholesale costs. Zachary Leather, Economist at the Resolution Foundation, said: 'Britain's net zero transition – in terms of both energy production and energy consumption – should be a cost of living win for consumers, but it will put more pressure on the electricity grid and could create more price volatility. 'Switching to flexible pricing for consumers could address these risks and reduce bills for everyone in the process.'
Telegraph
24-06-2025
- Automotive
- Telegraph
Punish electric car owners who charge at peak times, Miliband urged
Electric car owners should pay higher electricity bills for charging their cars at peak times, the Resolution Foundation has said. The think tank said electric vehicle (EVs) owners should be charged more for plugging in their cars in the evenings to encourage them to charge overnight instead. Delivering electricity to households and businesses at peak times, especially between 4.30pm and 8pm, is around twice as expensive as at other times of the day. Despite this, electricity costs the same regardless of when it is used, with the extra cost of delivery spread across the day. The Resolution Foundation warned that the mass adoption of EVs could make this system untenable as a surge in people topping up their cars when they get home from work would lead to a huge spike in delivery costs that would make bills far higher for everyone. 'As EV adoption grows, owners who don't shift their significant energy usage will push up peak demand, imposing greater costs on the system and inflating bills for everyone else,' the think tank said. It is calling for the Government to axe the energy price cap for EV owners who use too much electricity and instead introduce variable prices. This would in effect mean they would pay higher prices for charging in the evening, encouraging drivers to charge their vehicles late at night instead. 'To ensure households with EVs and other technologies that can use electricity in off-peak times do so, the Government should give a strong nudge to consumers by setting a usage limit above which Ofgem's current fixed-tariff price cap would not apply and shifting these households on to variable tariffs instead,' the Foundation said. Zachary Leather, author of the report, said: 'We're transitioning to a different kind of energy system, one where we need demand to respond a bit more to the supply [of energy]. 'Wind and solar and other kinds of renewables are variable, rather than being able to be turned off and turned on at will, so that means that we need more flexibility in the system.' He said EV owners who charged only during off-peak hours would not only lower average bills for the country as a whole but also save money themselves. The typical EV owner would be able to save £120 annually by charging overnight, the Foundation estimated. 'All of these people with lots of really high energy use are the kinds of households that are likely to be able to contribute to cheaper bills by flexing that energy use,' Mr Leather said. Zonal pricing The call for EV drivers to be punished for charging their cars at peak times through higher bills is part of a wider review of potential changes to the electricity market, including shifting to so-called 'zonal' pricing. This would see Britain's energy market broken up into different regions, with electricity prices in each areas based on local supply and demand. Zonal pricing already exists in several countries, including Australia, Italy and Sweden. Adopting it in Britain, however, could prove controversial as it poses higher bills for households and business in the South of England, where demand is greatest. Ed Miliband, the Energy Secretary, is considering whether to adopt a zonal system as part of the Review of Electricity Market Arrangements. An announcement is expected shortly. The Resolution Foundation said an energy system which varied prices by region and time of the day would offer households savings of £200 a year, on average. However, families who cannot avoid using higher amounts of energy in the evening risk being punished by the reforms, the think tank warned. Mr Leather said: 'The Government should encourage households with flexible but high-energy use technologies like Electric Vehicles to shift their electricity usage out of the peak-time early evening period, so as to reduce both theirs and others' energy bills. 'But it must also act to avoid the reforms penalising low-income households with unavoidable and inflexible electricity needs.' A spokesman for the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero said: 'We are working closely with industry to build a more flexible energy system, as part of our mission to deliver clean power by 2030. 'Off-peak tariffs already offer savings of around 75pc for electric vehicle owners when they charge overnight, in a strong incentive to make the most of cheap off-peak power.'
