Public Demand for Electric Cars Falls Sharply by 14%
Electric car sales have hit a bump in the road after demand from private motorists fell sharply by 14% last month, figures show, leading to calls for subsidies for electric vehicles. The Mail has more.
The 14.3% decline compared with September last year meant that fewer than one in ten private buyers of new cars opted for a battery-powered vehicle.
It is the latest setback in the push to achieve ‘Net Zero’ carbon emissions by 2050.
Rishi Sunak last month pushed back a ban on sales of new petrol and diesel vehicles from 2030 to 2035 – a victory for the Daily Mail‘s ‘Rethink the 2030 Petrol Car Ban‘ campaign.
The announcement is thought to have come too late in the month to affect September’s data, however.
The Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT), which compiled the figures, said the data showed electric car purchases needed to be subsidised as they are in other countries, including France, Germany, Australia and the U.S.
“Unlike in the other major markets working towards a 2035 end of sale date, U.K. private motorists have no purchase incentive to encourage them to invest in electric mobility,” the SMMT said.
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Why subsidise them? The sales of EVs are tanking because buyers don’t want them. They either fundamentally don’t meet buyers’ requirements or they’re not good enough value for money. If we (our tax money) do subsidise them enough to drive up sales then once ICE is dead and there is no alternative we’ll only have the inferior, more expensive option left.
It’s the drug pusher’s economics: sell at a loss and get them hooked, then you’ve got them.
BEVs have a niche market… virtue signallers, people with more money than sense. It is now saturated.
The economics of buying a new car usually involves selling an older car and I believe depreciation on BEVs is very high. Even some virtue signalling people with more money than sense might balk at buying another BEV if the trade-in value is seriously degraded.
Very few EVs are financed from the sale of a prior car, approaching 90% of EV sales are lease sales to companies. Company car drivers benefit by about £500 – £700 / month in terms of reduced tax as EVs are 0% rated in comparison to ICE cars at about 35%.
Many private buyers have been solar panel owners who effectively charge their cars for free. Those who installed their panels back in 2011/12 earn £0.63 /kWh for the energy generated even though they use it themselves.
Once you eat through these private buyers it becomes harder to find customers.
All true. But the article is specifically about a drop in sales to private motorists – not to companies. There are people (I know a few) who replace their ICE cars every 3 years or so. If instead such people bought a BEV and been stung by the depreciation will they buy another? My guess is they’ll be less inclined to do so.
A near neighbour has had a company Nissan Leaf (actually several of them – not sure why) for the past few years. He’s just bought a new petrol car with his own cash. I guess he’s not convinced a privately owned BEV would suit him.
The buyers of these things, usually involve brain dead sheeple!
Add to your list company car drivers who can benefit from the HMRC tax breaks compared to ICE cars
Yup. My older son has a hybrid company car for precisely that reason. He runs it on petrol since he can’t charge it at home and can’t be bothered with the time, inconvenience and cost of finding a public charging point. The only time the battery gets charged is when he’s in the office and can do it at their cost, which is about once a week.
And that illustrates just how ridiculous all this is – leading people to invest in electric capability purely for the tax motive, while still pumping emissions out at the same rate as before! Does Rishi reckon that, say, all occupants of high-rise tower blocks who own vehicles are going to have their own home charging stations down below by the year 2035? The infrastructure is impossible obviously, it’s yet another fantasy of the elites that has no grounding in reality. Bit like 15-minute cities, really.
“Why Subsidise them”. ——–Because government pick winners and losers based on political agenda’s. Wind energy eg. gets 100% subsidy, as no one would ever build one otherwise. Because they are totally uneconomical. The electric car is part of the green agenda for the same ideological reasons—The Political Agenda of Sustainable Development.
Instead of trying to save the planet in a few years, and failing, wouldn’t it better to not panic and come up with better solutions over a longer period of time using R & D. I know know, it’s all a hoax, but it would be pretty cool if they invented an alternative to oil from Saudi. And spend money on sea defences as they have been rising since the 19th century.
Sea levels have not risen. Land levels in England (esp the South East) have slightly lowered, which is an entirely different matter, and there’s nothing that can be done about it. It’s called “glacial isostatic adjustment”.
Shirley we could freeze the seawater and pile it up somewhere to save SE England? Obvs we mustn’t pile it up on SE England ‘cos that would defeat the object. The extra ice would even help combat global
warmboiling as long as we use heat pumps. Not going to do it? See: it is our fault.They must have risen at some point, having entered an interglacial 20 000 years. The glaciers and ice caps retreated- the sea level must rise. More recently we entered a mini-ice age, and when that ended the sea levels rose again. In the 19th and early 20 centuary it wasn’t man-made co2, as not enough had been produced. In fact in the 1920s and 1930s, it was rising at the same rate as it is now, but nobody cared back then. However, are sea levels going to rise to cover the statue of liberty and big ben- not for 8000 years at the current rate, and we might enter another ice age before that.
The raised beaches on the Western Isles indicate that sea level has been higher around the UK coasts than now.
Fact, dear boy, facts…
Also missed is the fact that the British Isle land mass is tilting, the SE is sinking into the earths crust, (London at a rate of 3mm per year) and the NW is rising as an effect of the removal of the weight of the glaciers on the land mass, and will continue to do so, not Climate Change at all.
It is not fact that I have missed, and was well aware of isostaic changes. I was not talking about sea level changes in UK par se, but global sea level changes.
The Western Isles are not a good example, as the land in Scotland has risen due to isostatic rebound after the ice age. I was talking about the global mean sea level. Also your first graph is of the Gulf of Mexico and illustrates one of my points about 20000 years of sea level rise. The second graph is of Qatar. The graph’s paper ‘s abstract states “”Early Holcene suggest rapid rates of tectonic uplift…”, so presumably isostatic changes, although I think one can get localised sea level drops- not my area of expertise so I don’t know.
If your aim is to destroy western liberal democracy this is a great solution.
“Isn’t it our duty to bring that about”—–Maurice Strong
It is more like the land around the south of England is sinking rather than the sea rising, just as it is in Holland. Sea levels are rising slowly at about 7 inches per century but they were doing that long before humans were burning any coal. But crucially there is no evidence of any increase in the rate of sea level rise.
I read a very interesting article in the Daily Telegraph years ago …. shortly after the Twin Towers were destroyed …. which basically said that in order to protect itself and to eventually force changes in the governments and oil-based economies of the middle east (and other rogue states) …. the USA, and therefore the west, had to wean itself off imported oil from these states.
That’s what appears to be happening. They’re playing a very long game.
“The Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT), which compiled the figures, said the data showed electric car purchases needed to be subsidised as they are in other countries…”
Tell you what chaps, we’ll all set up a standing order each month into the bank accounts of your members, then we can cut out the middle-man and not even bother with the cars.
Now why don’t you just bu**er off.
We should tell the operators of wind farms to b…r off as well since they also get 100% subsidy.
The insurance companies have now noticed the propensity of EV cars to burst into flames, as well as the expense of repairing them. Rates have increased accordingly.
Similarly, extended warranties are likely to become expensive.
Does anyone know about solar panel fires? I.e. is there a problem for the fire brigade trying to put out house fires where solar panels are installed?
I rather doubt they are a problem.
Very good article in German on the catastrophic consequences of the current political mindset, pursuing the wrong goals without any intention of a course reversal ever, equally valid for the UK and throughout the West.
https://www.achgut.com/artikel/deutschland_not_durch_falsche_ziele
Merkel. She’s destroyed Germany.
Did she copy Bliar or he her?
One way TPTB could try and push EV sales will be to jack up the price of petrol and diesel. Also, there is talk of diesel being in short supply;
https://www.ccjdigital.com/economic-trends/article/15634628/will-there-be-a-diesel-fuel-shortage-in-2023
If that is the case I expect that priority will be given to Agriculture and Haulage and supplies of diesel for private motoring could be restricted.
In the end it may come down to a choice of EV or no car and no travelling. I expect that as long as petrol is still available there will be a huge effort to keep old cars going as long as possible although doubtless they will try and stop that with ever more stringent MOT tests.
Civil wars are coming, whether you like it or not.
Why should I, a tax payer, fund these useless objects?
Electric cars are already massively subsidised – both at point of manufacture and at point of sale. Enough is enough!
And that fall is accompanied by almost exclusive advertising for electric vehicles on all media.
Funny how things “work”, isn’t it?!
Luckily for them advertising agencies are judged by “opportunities to see” rather than sales in the short term, however renewed contracts do depend on sales.
“leading to calls for subsidies for electric vehicles”
**** subsidies. You have to be pretty well off to afford an EV. So taking money off those who cannot afford them to help pay for yours is immoral.
Same goes for heat pumps. Another heist from the poor to help the better off.
Anybody else noticed the absence of mileage data on the TV ads that has EV’s driving across a desert with no obvious charging station within 100 miles. What a joke. The Betamax of the automotive industry, plain and simple.
Electric car, smart meter, wind turbine, solar panel, etc etc . They are all part of the same pretend to save the planet eco socialist scam. Everything Green is about lowering living standards and removing freedoms. There is nothing about renewables that is better than what already exists and the seemingly plausible excuse for using them is “the climate crisis”, which is something that is not supported by any science. It is a political term not a scientific one.——People always know best how to spend their own money, but green politics wants to spend it for you based on false claims of a “climate emergency”. Once people realise there is no emergency they are going to be very angry, but the mainstream media are making sure this never happens. Our mainstream News channels are not investigative journalists. They are simply activists for every Liberal Progressive agenda. They are a propaganda machine. Nowadays know as PR.
Surprise, surprise. People won’t waste their money on an inferior product. Who’d-a-thunk it?
I demand that the government subsidises fridge freezers and wall lights, underwear, fencing and dog food!
Why not? F the open free consumerist market, subsidise everything to make it sell!
Unless anyone’s incentivizing me to greater than the total cost of the car plus its insurance, I’m not interested.
I don’t put a price on life and limb, and will never set foot in something that is demonstrably a fire-hazard with a mind if its own!
And I will never set foot in a vehicle for which battery damage equals its write-off, which run the risk of collapsing multi-storey car parks, for which there can never realistically be enough charging points (think of on-street parking along terraced rows), for which the insurance breaks the bank, and the very cheapest of which, bought new, is roughly 8 times my monthly salary.