Email submitted to my State Senator and Representative today. Texas gave me a topical opening:
As you may have heard, Texas has reinstated it’s incentives for alternative-fuel vehicles. Georgia once had such an incentive program as you may recall; and this seems like an opportune moment to ask for such an incentive to return here.
I do not ask for the exact incentive that once applied to Georgia, as it had it’s flaws:
1) It was exclusively limited to vehicles powered only by electric batteries (“BEVs”), which resulted in a large fleet of Japanese Nissan LEAFs (the only affordable BEV available at the time) and not Chevrolet Volts which were made in this Country.
Note that the Federal incentive is open to Plug-In Hybrid Vehicles, (“PHEVs”) based on an electric range of 40 miles or more. Studies have shown that most of their driving is done on battery power, except when making long trips (making EV charging infrastructure unnecessary). Note also that when they do buy gas, the owners must pay a tax in addition to the $200 ad valorem tax for electric vehicles. This doesn’t add up to a lot, but it is inherently unfair.
2) As a tax refund, it was those whose taxes were $5000 or more who benefited most from the program. Those making less (even though buyers were given two years to use it), were less incentivized. The cars aren’t as expensive now, and we should now move on to incentize a larger group of purchasers. The incentive would be far better expressed as a full rebate offered through dealers. In that case, I think $2500 would be acceptable.
Benefits:
1) Cleaner air. Tailpipes congregate where people do, in the larger cities where air pollution is a risk for the greatest number. Regardless of the fuel used to generate the electricity, tangible health benefits will result from greater numbers of EVs.
2) Diversity of fuel supply. Electricity is a domestically produced commodity: You will never see a tanker arriving from the Middle East loaded with electricity. It can be generated using a wide variety of fuels and methods, unlike today’s transportation based solely on petroleum products.
3) Greater resistance to destabilizing events. The hurricane Katrina-caused fuel shortage of the last decade would be mitigated in the future with a sufficient number of electric vehicles. This would have a direct and positive economic impact. Note that PHEVs are immune to widescale power disruption because of their backup system: Gas engines.
4) Load leveling. EPRI studies have shown that the electric fleet can grow to much greater numbers without hurting electric delivery and production if they are charged at night. A lower rate plan for nighttime hours exists. This is not just a power company issue, since the construction failure of units 3 and 4 at plant Vogtle, with subsequent bond and possible supply issues for the State.
At the very least, greater numbers of EVs would do no harm.
5) The previous incentive elevated Georgia to a regional lead in the number of electric vehicles, surely worth some “bragging rights” for whatever that’s worth. Georgia lights up on a map of EV usage by State: showing that you don’t have to be a “Beautiful People” California to excel in positive action.
No, I didn’t mention Climate Change. That position is well known, and not likely to sell well under the Gold Dome at present.