China Updates EV Subsidy Program To Favor Long-Range BEVs

JUN 16 2018 BY MARK KANE 28

Modified electric car subsidies in China, that now support models with longer-range, comes into force.

The government now requires at least 150 km (93 miles) of range for BEVs to get any discount (previously the cut off was 100 km). China also increased the subsidies for the longest-range models.

Citi bank analyzed the changes and sees it as a positive. There will be big growth in the battery market as the packs become larger. It’s also expected that this year, some 1.15 million New Energy Cars will be sold in China.

“The new subsidies are more than enough to cover the battery cost for a typical 300-km EV. This should be very beneficial to battery demand due to bigger batteries being installed in EVs.”

The amount of subsidies is enough to cover a significant part of the associated battery costs.

Incentives for all-electric cars depending on range:

  • 150-200 km: 15,000 yuan (≈$2,330)
  • 200-250 km: 24,000 yuan (≈$3,730)
  • 250-300 km: 34,000 yuan (≈$5,280)
  • 300-400 km: 45,000 yuan (≈$6,990)
  • over 400  km: 50,000 yuan (≈$7,770)

* The official range ratings probably are far from real-world driving, as China’s test methods aren’t very accurate.

Source: Platts

Categories: China


Leave a Reply

28 Comments on "China Updates EV Subsidy Program To Favor Long-Range BEVs"

newest oldest most voted

But here’s the real question… How does China rate the range of these vehicles? I mean, you can buy a Chinese-made electric scooter that easily proclaims 30 miles of range on the advertising and in real life it will actually go about 3 miles.

Pretty obviously, as reported by just about everybody and his brother, China over-rates EV range rather substantially, even more than the European driving cycle overestimates it.

But I have not been able to find any article which actually tries to analyze just how much range is over-rated, or what ratio should be applied to approximate real-world range.

Hardly the real question. China rates the range by a standardized test cycle just like everywhere else in the world. The Chinese test cycle is based on NEDC so the inflated numbers in China follow the same inflation rate as in Europe.

What electric scooters has to do with this I do not know, you really think that electric scooters is relevant in a discussion about cars?

I can buy an american made electric hoover board that basically claims whatever it wants. That doesn’t mean that I will suddenly question the EPA range testing on EV cars.

As long as the test stays the same, the 50% increase will have the same affect. If those cars got 50 km before in real life, they now have to go 75 km. The increase is the important fact here.

from somewhere over the rainbow…

The new subsidy policy also prioritizes EVs with high energy density and low battery power consumption. As to energy density of batteries, the criteria of battery energy density were divided into four levels. The NEVs with battery energy density ranging from 105Wh/kg to 120Wh/kg will be granted 0.6 times subsidies, 120Wh/kg to 140Wh/kg, 1 time subsidies, 140 Wh/kg to 160 Wh/kg, 1.1 times subsidies, and more than 160Wh/kg 1.2 times subsidies.

Pack or cell level?


That’s pretty stupid, actually. How would you rate battery pack weight? Now all Chinese manufacturers will try to move everything but the cells out of the packs.

I also think adding a good crash protection to the pack shouldn’t be punished. But I don’t need to drive in China, so they will find out themselves…

So when will the US credits be renewed? It’s not going well for Tesla, GM

So when will the US credits be renewed? It’s not going well for Tesla, GM. US got all the wind energy it needs from central plain states. I am against fracturing as it destalize the geology. Oil company didn’t pay for sunk homes and polluted water. I live in Texas but because of this I am against fracturing! These oil should be saved in strategic reserves just for war purpose! Don’t waste it on commuting needs. It’s so sad US businessmen are penny wise and pound foolish! They don’t have a long-term planning. Business leaders suck in this country despite all the good innovative engineers’ contribution.

I think the US subsides should be renewed with three changes.

1) No per manufacturer limit on number of cars, one single pool for all manufactures.

2} Point of sale credit not rebate, this way all income levels can benefit.

3} Minimum battery sizes should at least double to qualify for a credit, you don’t get full credit unless there is 33+ kwhr.

Agree, except your last point is arbitrary and needlessly discourages PHEVs. I feel PHEVs have an important role to play for at least another decade.

Paul’s point #3 is good because we should not arbitrarily and needlessly encourage PHEVs. I feel that PHEV are a technological dead end and not worth the resources. When gas stations start shuttering due to future market forces, PHEVs become really bad, short-range EVs. Gasoline is a crutch that makes them worse, not better.

Strapping an engine to an EV is like shipping an iPhone with a physical keyboard… The keyboard was a great solution at the time but, who wants that now? Technology made the old, hacky solutions obsolete and ridiculous. The engine makes the EV worse just like a physical keyboard would make an iPhone worse.

“When gas stations start shuttering due to future market forces,” we’ve got like 10-20years before that really becomes a problem.

More like 30 to 40 years if then. Most commentators here are in dreamland with the regard to the rate at which fossil fuel cars will be displaced. Time will tell of course.

A plug in hybrid is an excellent choice for those who can charge at home and if it is a high mileage car once running on petroleum. All the advantages of an efficient petroleum powered car with most of the EV benefits for short/medium trips where the benefits of an EV are greatest anyway. Not purity desired by an EV zealot but the cost effective reduction of CO2 production is the goal.

I don’t even think it discourages PHEVs, it just encourages them to have useful ranges. A PHEV such as the Volt could still get half credit and 33 kwhr would be a good amount for a full size truck or SUV. We don’t need PHEVs with tiny batteries.

And subsidy only good for cars $35k or less.

Your point 3) shoud be based on EPA range, not battery size. If someone wants an oversized vehicle needing a big battery to get anywhere, that doesn’t merit subsidies. Frugality should be stimulated, not discouraged.

In China or in Japan the subsidy depends from the charging time? I remember something like if the charging time from AC circuit takes longer than 8 hours no subsidy for the car.

That was a (old?) rule in South Korea.

Some say this picks “winners and losers”, I would say we need more winners.

Most of Chinese EV incentives are made to improve the Chinese car industry.

This is meant to reduce the amount of competitors, through forced competition. So the idea behind it is to find winners and losers.

No more subsidy for PHEV’s?

Wouldn’t a subsidy per kWh installed battery be the easiest? They say that soon when batteries are cheaper, they’ll be cost competitive with ICE. So make the cells cheaper. If they can’t make a cheap car if the battery cost 120-70=50 maybe the future isn’t so bright anyways?

Per kWh would benefit larger and heavier vehicles instead of looking at range. It would be pretty stupid to look at just kWh.

Why would it be stupid to subsidies the batteries themselves? It’s less specific, and specific subsisides are almost always worse and easier to game.

The main reason is, that Chinese manufacturers don’t sell big vehicles. Big vehicles are usually luxury cars from Europe and the US. Do you think China wants to subsidize Tesla, Audi and Jaguar with their 90-100 kWh batteries?

By using the minimum cap, they can reduce the incentives on PHEVs. So all the BMWs, Mercedeses, Cadillacs, Audis, Buicks etc.

The Volt based Buick will surely get 100km on NEDC, or the Cadillac CT6 PHEV.