MemberSeptember 21, 2021 at 2:14 pm
I believe that letting our representatives know we support subsidies for vehicles with no tailpipe emissions is the priority. I believe it is OK to let them know that as negotiations proceed, it would be better to focus on subsidizing results associated with this goal while keeping secondary objectives as separate incentives where possible. A simple credit of $25/mile of EPA range up to a limit based on the GVWR would accommodate everything from bikes to semi’s and allow negotiation room in setting the various limits. Add-on incentives up to 10% each could support consensus building initiatives on top of the base amount without completely overwhelming the primary intent.
There is not a single EV form factor that works for everyone (bicycle, motorcycle, 3-wheeler, 2-seater, 4-seater, 8-seater, shuttle, cargo, towing, etc.) so federal incentives should focus on reducing the barrier to adoption for all form factors allowing consumers to make the choice based on individual utility rather than price models that heavily favor selective categories.
I suppose I support any legislation lowering the barrier to EV adoption, but it would sure be nice to steer incentives towards policies that are less prescriptive to better reward efficiency innovation like we are seeing with Aptera.