Over 80 percent of new cars sold in Norway were electric in 2023 : technology

[-] Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world 29 points 10 months ago

Norway has been pretty famously aggressive with incentives for EVs, but remember, Norway is a petro state. Half of Norway’s exports are fossil fuels.

[-] Urist@lemmy.ml 18 points 10 months ago

Half of value of exported goods come from fossil fuels. Exported services constitute almost as much value as goods. Hence more like 1/4 of exports. Also, many norwegian companies have their business functions abroad and therefore do not contribute to these export numbers at all.

Source SSB, official norwegian statistics

[-] GiddyGap@lemm.ee 12 points 10 months ago

Which undermines the argument that EVs don't work in cold weather. They are just less efficient.

[-] skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 10 months ago

Makes sense with their cheap and abundant hydropower

[-] Muffi@programming.dev -1 points 10 months ago

80% of microplastics in the oceans are from car wheels. Electric cars are only slightly better for the environment than ICEs, but no personal vehicle will ever be sustainable. We need to upgrade public transportation to handle our transportational needs, and we need this upgrade process to start years ago.

[-] GiddyGap@lemm.ee 13 points 10 months ago

Electric cars are only slightly better for the environment than ICEs

They are much, much better than ICEs on emissions when fueled with renewable electricity.

[-] Cosmonauticus@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

The problem is ppl forget that manufacturing of EVS adds to the climate crisis too. REDUCE and REUSE. Ideally we should be reducing the use of personal cars and focus on public transport. That an reusing older model cars (even ICE's) that are more fuel efficient

[-] GiddyGap@lemm.ee 7 points 10 months ago

I agree that we should pour more energy and resources into expanding public transportation. But I think it's very important to make personal transportation more efficient as well, especially if we want conservatives onboard. And we do need everyone onboard on this.

[-] asdfasdfasdf@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I agree, but I think a more attainable solution is to try to find a better way of disposing of car tires and garbage in general rather than trying to reduce / remove cars from the streets. We should be doing both though.

[+] Buffalox@lemmy.world -10 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

AFAIK Toyota Yaris doesn't exist as an EV, only Hybrid (and ICE).
Hybrid is not electric, it's not ICE either, that's why it's called Hybrid!
But the Yaris isn't even a proper plugin Hybrid, because it's "self charging" meaning it drives on gasoline that is used to make the electricity to drive. You can't even charge it!!! If you put Gas/Petrol in it to drive, it's not an electric, it's not even a hybrid, it's a gasoline/petrol car!!!

Especially law makers need to get that through their thick heads. And please don't buy the Toyota propaganda.
Self charging needs to be measured as 100% gas/petrol driven cars, because that's what it is.

[-] coffeebiscuit@lemmy.world 16 points 10 months ago

The article doesn’t claim the Yaris is an EV. It claims that 80% op total car sales were EV’s. The Yaris probably is in the 20%. The Toyota BZ4X is in the 80%.

[-] Buffalox@lemmy.world -2 points 10 months ago

Ah yes I see that now, kind of poor journalism to not mark which are actually electric, making it just a list of 20 cars that says nothing except they are in the top 20. Not very useful. It only says Toyota Yaris, which exist as both self charging and normal ICE, and Kona exist both as EV and ICE, so are they lumped together?

Stupid schematic to include, when it doesn't say anything relevant to the article.

[-] coffeebiscuit@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago

They indeed should have pointed out which ones are EV’s and which aren’t.

[-] Buffalox@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

Thanks, I know I made a mistake, but all the cars I knew on that list were Electric. Because currently we only look at electric for our next car.
So I think it's a mistake that's easy to make.

[-] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 15 points 10 months ago

If you put Gas in it to drive, it's not an electric.

I agree, but it is a bit more complicated depending on model and drivetrain as well in certain situations.

Some hybrids the electric is an assist that's always there. Other models operate using electric only at lower speeds, then switch to gas for higher speeds and distance driving. In some cities with severe stop and go traffic congestion, that may effectively be an electric vehicle most of the time.

Either way though, for a comparison like this hybrids should be considered their own category, or be included in ICE if just trying to compare EV sales versus traditional sales.

[-] Buffalox@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

In this case it's a self charging meaning the electricity is 100% generated by an ICE motor. Meaning the driving energy is 100% Gas.
Doesn't matter that the gas energy is used to generate electricity, it's still 100% gas, and can easily be measured as such, and taxed as such.

Plugin Hybrids are a bit different, but are still not electric, and shouldn't enjoy the tax benefits of being electric, and shouldn't be included in stats for electric, because they are not.

[-] DacoTaco@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

Plugin hybrids arent ice either. I can drive my audi a3 full electric for as long as there is charge in the battery.

I agree they need to be seperated in statistics, but law wise, keep them as electric. They are a good stepping stone to prepare us for whats to come

[-] Buffalox@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

Next year it will be illegal to sell any kind of ICE car in Norway, including hybrid / plugin hybrid. So at least Norway doesn't agree.
Also we have made tests in Denmark, that shows that Hybrid does not come even close to live up to the promises of car makers, that were the basis for tax deductions.
I understand the advantage of Hybrid, combining electric and long range at lower cost, but they are not the same as a fully electric car, and shouldn't share those tax advantages.

[-] DacoTaco@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Fair, in regard to tax advantagea they shouldnt be the same as electric. I agree with that.

Its stupid that my audi has the same tax advantages as a kia ev6 despite it beeing bad, and if not worse, for the environment.

But i wouldnt say that law wise they should be considered like ice cars, They arent that. Optimally, they should be considered what they are : hybrids, a step between ice and ev. They arent ice and they arent ev's either. Yet, as is, nobody looks at hybrids so we just deal with them like ev's. Better that than ice imo or i, as a single guy renting a place, would be royally fucked that i would be forced to take a ev i cant charge at home or ice that i would pay a shit ton for

[-] Buffalox@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

Self charging hybrid is easy, they should be considered ICE no doubt IMO.
But I agree it's more difficult with plug in hybrid. Because they may drive 90% as an EV, or they may drive 90% as an ICE car, that was just cheaper because it had a tax advantage.
Problem is if you tax them close to EV, it will be exploited by people who kind of use them just like ICE cars.
However in Norway it will soon not matter much, because all cars that have any kind of Internal combustion engine, is considered ICE, and will be illegal to sell from 2025!
Maybe a bit dramatic, but if they are already at 80% EV of new car sales, they are definitely on track.

[-] DacoTaco@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

Oh ye, in the case with norway, if electric is working then fuck hybrids!

[-] Kepabar@startrek.website 2 points 10 months ago

They are more efficient than pure ICE vehicles though in most situations.

At low speed and city driving the regenerative breaking can make a 30mpg motor into a 50-60 mpg motor.

I drove one for awhile and the efficiency is noticable.

[-] Buffalox@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago

They are more efficient than pure ICE vehicles though in most situations.

Yes absolutely, I'm not saying self charging doesn't have merit, it's just not an electric, but only a more economic ICE car.

[-] Nollij@sopuli.xyz 2 points 10 months ago

It really depends on exactly what you're measuring and what your goals are (and thus, what the law does/should say). Is the goal to reduce the amount of fuel (petrol) used? Then yes, tax incentives should apply via whatever metric you're using. If the goal is to incentivize a switch to a different fuel source, regardless of efficiency, then no.

Many people with plugin hybrids only add gas a few times per year. The (small) battery is enough for them ~95% of the time. For most (but not all) purposes, that would count as an EV. I can see your point about them not being the same, and why it would need to be handled separately, but it feels too absolutist. There are certainly shades of gray in it.

[-] Buffalox@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago

tax incentives should apply

Yes, but as an ICE car, not as an electric, I think most countries have this by now, that cars are taxed lower if their mileage is better. But for electric it's even lower, because they drive on partially renewable energy from the power grid, and they don't pollute in cities. Those factors don't apply for Hybrid cars.

Many people with plugin hybrids only add gas a few times per year.

Yes and that's the basis for their tax rebates here, but the research shows that the level of gas used for hybrids is way higher than manufacturers promised. People generally buy hybrid because they have recurring situations where they need the extended range the gas provides. So in general a hybrid is driven quite a lot on gas. If you don't have that need, you might as well buy an electric. Ergo Hybrids should at most receive half the tax rebate IMO. And they should never be counted as electric, because they are not.

[-] TheRealKuni@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

Plugin Hybrids are a bit different, but are still not electric, and shouldn't enjoy the tax benefits of being electric, and shouldn't be included in stats for electric, because they are not.

I agree they shouldn’t be lumped in with EVs for statistical purposes, but they also shouldn’t be treated the same as ICEs or hybrids. There should still be some measure of the incentives (and penalties) associated with EVs.

We got a tax break when we bought our PHEV, but a lower one than a full EV would get. We also pay more each year for our vehicle registration for road maintenance (since we pay less in gas tax), but less than a full EV would. This all seems fair to me since we can get anywhere from 25-40 miles of pure EV usage on a full charge (depending on how hard we’re driving and how cold it is outside). We’re averaging around 120mpg over the life of the vehicle, far better than a non-plug-in hybrid could hope to achieve.

[-] Buffalox@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

We’re averaging around 120mpg over the life of the vehicle,

Wow, that's actually quite good. Congrats.

[-] Buffalox@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

There should still be some measure of the incentives (and penalties) associated with EVs.

I suppose the easy solution would be to increase tax on gas, and lower it on electricity. That would also be the most fair IMO, but apparently people don't want that?
But that would make the hybrid more beneficial according to the gas savings. IDK maybe that somehow isn't entirely fair either?

[-] Xeminis@lemm.ee 4 points 10 months ago

Nothing here suggests Yaris is electric. It is a list of all the most popular models in Norway (including ICE) with their market shares, and the electric ones (so not Yaris) are over 82%. Yaris would be in the gas-hybrid category of 6%, or in the plug-in hybrid category with another 8%.

[-] Buffalox@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago

Yes, that's already been stated, and I have recognized that.

[-] VikingHippie@lemmy.wtf 1 points 10 months ago

Hybrid is not electric, it's not ICE either, that's why it's called Hybrid!

Hybrid means "both this and that", not "neither this nor that". I'm pretty sure kids learn that in elementary school, middle school at the very latest 🤦

You're also wrong about the rest but I don't care enough about your nonsense to go into further detail.

[+] RobotToaster@mander.xyz -16 points 10 months ago

Doesn't Norway have a very classist motoring policy?

[-] Fjern@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago

Please provide more information. Thank

[+] RobotToaster@mander.xyz -15 points 10 months ago

My understanding is their tax policy makes it so only the very wealthy can afford a car.

[-] wicked@programming.dev 8 points 10 months ago

Your understanding is that in one of the countries with the least difference between rich and poor only the rich can afford cars?

[-] Ab_intra@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

Saying that the difference is small is wrong in today's Norway. The difference is growing and are just getting worse.

[-] spongebue@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago

Singapore has a ton of policies that make car ownership extremely expensive, including a 10-year certificate of ownership that costs over $100,000 USD. Maybe that's what you were thinking of?

Fuel in Norway is very expensive, and I'm sure other ownership costs are similar. But that's true of much of Europe and they have very good public transit so a car isn't as much of a necessity as it is in the US.

[-] Ab_intra@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

That is the most stupid thing I've ever read. It's very expensive to own a car here but it's not just for the rich.

[-] UndercoverUlrikHD@programming.dev 2 points 10 months ago

High import taxes, as with everything else in Norway. EVs were exempt from a lot of the taxes, which is partly why they got popular.

Technology

Our Rules

Approved Bots