Germany Weighs Additional Measures To Support Electric Cars

JUL 12 2015 BY MIKE ANTHONY 48

Gross Dölln, Germany already has charging highways for commercial trucks… We suppose that is a start…

Gross Dölln, Germany already has charging highways for commercial trucks… We suppose that is a start…

Germany aims to have 1 million EVs on its roads by the end of 2020, and Chancellor Angela Merkel is supposed to make supporting decisions by the end of this year.

Merkel states:

“Germany will have no choice but to offer further support (for electric cars) although we’ve already done some things. We will once again study all instruments of support that are also available internationally.”

Germany (and surrounding countries) also have several Tesla Superchargers, so that should also help, right?

Germany (and surrounding countries) also have several Tesla Superchargers, so that should help, right?

On top of a lack of EV incentives (Germany has mostly refused to offer electric car incentives so far to the public), and a substandard charging network, there were only ~ 19,000 EVs sold in Germany in 2014. So, it is clear that there will need to be quite a few measures put in place to boost that up dramatically.

Daimler CEO, Dieter Zetsche adds in that the European Union has to cut the fleet emissions to 95 grams / km, and it can’t be done without a “considerable” amount of EVs. He further says that there should be some sort of “temporary start-up fund(ing)” to kick-start EVs.

He states:

“We need some of the tools as accompanying measures by the government if we want to have a chance to achieve the 1 million (sales) goal.”

We hope to have further reports on Germany’s progress and new initiatives towards the end of 2015.

Source: Reuters

Categories: General

Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

48 Comments on "Germany Weighs Additional Measures To Support Electric Cars"

newest oldest most voted
Jim Gord

If Daimler or Audi were smart they would accept Tesla’s free patents and install high speed chargers in their upcoming EVs and PHEVs and then triple the number of “Tesla” Superchargers as compensation for Tesla giving them access to the Tesla supercharger network

Speculawyer

Well, there is nothing they have to do to ‘accept’ the patents. They are just free to design technology that infringes the Tesla patents and if Tesla tried to enforce them against Daimler or Audi, a court would just not allow enforcement as long as they followed the terms of Tesla’s declaration.

But access to the Tesla Superchargers? That they can’t do without a license from Tesla since I’m sure Tesla has a security system that requires authorized electronic keys.

Someone out there

Tesla has said that other manufacturers are welcome to join the Supercharger network as long as their cars can handle the power and the manufacturers pay their fair share of the development and maintenance of the network.

Just_Chris

Free for 5 years then you have to licence. Tesla are smart and aggressive I wouldn’t touch their patents with a barge pole. As for the SC network I suspect that using it comes with more catches than a fetish party.

Tesla are exactly what the ev world needs but they are not blue eyed hippies on a mission to get everyone back to mother earthy goodness, they are in it to win it, not give everyone a helping hand.

Pushmi-Pullyu

Just_Chris said:

“Free for 5 years then you have to licence.”

When did anyone at Tesla ever say any such thing about using the Supercharger patents?

I don’t know how a court would rule, but Elon Musk made repeated and very broad public statements about Tesla’s patents (or at least the Supercharger patents) being free for anyone and everyone to use as they please. After that, I think it would be difficult for Tesla to enforce their patent rights, even if they changed their minds about making them free for all.

Speculawyer

Do it. Install more onshore and offshore wind to generate electricity.

But slow down your phase-out of nukes . . . they don’t generate any carbon output. I understand if you don’t want to build more but get your money’s worth out of what you have already invested in nukes.

Carsten

There are times of too much RE on the grid in Germany as it is now. Merkel put together a glorious plan “Energiewende” and now the states, especially Bavaria, blocks new transmission lines going North to South. Traditionally, the power went more South to North. Germany’s neighboring countries (Poland, Czech Republic and Austria) have to upgrade their distribution systems to avoid blackouts from Germany pumping electricity into their grid, when there is no need.
At the moment it’s about distribution and storage, not the amount of RE.
Don’t get me wrong, I love RE and EV’s but all subsystems have to be developed in unison.
I said it here before, Germany has much less need for EV’s due to shorter commutes,public transport and single car households, then we have here in the US.

Three Electrics
Phr3d

yep, that is the wave, future is don’t buy specific turbines and shut them off, buy a cost-effective turbine and shunt to “inneficient” hydrogen production. Initially it can be blended to NG to offset that expense.

Mapper

Yes – doing this in Japan as well as a way to buffer the peaks of renewables. You can blend hydrogen into conventional NG to about 30% or so without impacting users. win-win and you don’t even have to use the hydrogen for transportation…

Priusmaniac

30%!
That’s a joke or what?
10%, at most without having to change all the burners.

Also very bad idea from the start anyway.

Pushmi-Pullyu

Actually, hydrogen is being blended into natural gas at a 15% fraction.

30% is an absurd claim. Not practical.

Pushmi-Pullyu

Carsten said:

“I said it here before, Germany has much less need for EV’s due to shorter commutes,public transport and single car households, then we have here in the US.”

Seems rather counter-productive to me for Germany to spend massive amounts of money installing and subsidizing solar power, yet not take advantage of that by promoting EVs.

Germany may have less of a per-capita need for EV adoption to reduce burning fossil fuels, but the need is still a substantial one.

Carsten

They can’t fully take advantage of all the produced RE due to the fact, that there are not sufficient transfer lines to get the RE to consumers. There are Offshore Windfarms in the North Sea, that can’t be connected since there is no infrastructure to transport the energy,…
That’s why I said that subsidizing solar or any other RE is not the issue at the moment.
German legislation and investors have to come together and create an intelligent grid, that can cope with distributed RE and large amounts of RE coming out of non-traditional energy-producing areas.

lustuccc

It’s no big deal to add transmission lines, all it takes is steel,isolators and wires and in some cases,some expropriations.

mr. M

Trust me, in germany the transmission lines are the hardest part. They even agreed to make transmission lines underground (2-3 times the cost) because of civil protests.

JakeY

It’s a self inflicted wound. They have a stupid law that disallows throttling of renewable energy even then it means overloading the grid. If they didn’t have such a law they can build as much RE as they want (there is never “too much”), but they put themselves in a situation where storage is absolutely necessary.

mr. M

You can trottle RE, but you get paid a compensation.

Just_Chris

How about just controlling the charging of ev’s with simple price signals to smart chargers. A massive, distributed controllable load might mean you can have your cake and eat it.

mr. M

With only 30.000 EVs, and 99% charged at home with same price 24/7 this makes no sense. However in 10-15 years this seems like a good solution

lustuccc

Nukes? Well informed people know that only one, ONLY ONE accident can kill millions and create no man’s land for milleniums. Oh! I know, we always think that it won’t happen…
Beside we still can’t deal efficiently and securely with forever accumulating nuclear wastes. You know, leaks, genetic malformations, growing cancer rates, tons and tons of highly contaminated water leaking daily in the Pacific ocean since 2011, that kind of stuff that we know is caused in part by nuclear activities but cannot prove for sure… this is not what I call a clean technology. It is expensive, very hazardous and generate way more poisonous waste than CO2.
Clean if no accident… or the worst nightmare.
A leak of wind or a spill of sunshine will only give even more free clean and foevr renewable energy.
When I look at the nuclear plants, I cannot refrain from thinking how scupid can the human race be sometime.

Mikael

Ridiculous. Any well informed person would know that nuclear kills the fewest persons per generated unit of energy.

Wind power is more dangerous, solar power is a lot more dangerous (especially roof-top mounted solar).
But none of these gets remotely close to how many lives natural gas, oil and coal takes.

Irrational fear spread by ignorance is very harmful. In a better world all people would be guided by facts and science, taking true responsability for the environment and doing the least harm possible to the nature, people and animals.

Djoni

And well informe people know well there’s no available solution to secure nuclear waste permannantly now and no solution in the foreseable future.
So shovelling to future generation make sense for some.
Let alone Fukushima or Tchernobyl event.
Blind by too much propaganda ain’t good either.
The only nuclear reactor that have been harmless* forever and free is up there far away.
It’s call the sun.

*O.K the sun ain’t harmless, but pretty easy to get in the shade.

Lustuccc

Tu devrais te procurer ce livre Djoni

Pushmi-Pullyu

Oh, please. You could read just one article that shows nuclear waste is only a political problem. The engineering problem was solved long ago by the French.

Or, you could continue to swallow the hysterical anti-nuke propaganda about “RADIATION!!”

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/reaction/readings/french.html

Lustuccc

Could you please read in calm, one of my links?
Nuclear clouds do NOT stop at borders, there is a political reason to perpetuate this non sense, but the dangers are REAL! We are sorcerer apprentices playing with the atom.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/50-reasons-we-should-fear-the-worst-from-fukushima/5367230

I find it quite puzzling that propaganda changed the mind of so many of you, in my youth EVERY body in America and the world were well aware of the extreme dangers of nuclear technology. Now some of you seem convinced that nukes are harmless?!?

Also much puzzling that EVERY time I rise the dilemna, I am immediately tagged as “hysterical”, even when we had in the past so many conversation in a logical, peaceful and rational manner.
WTF happened to you people?!?

These are in no way photoshopped pictures, they are a small sample of the plain horrible truth about nuclear hazards.
http://tinyurl.com/olfmcnc

Lustuccc

Here in Quebec, we had one nuclear plant, and we decided to decommission it. It will take SIXTY YEARS! Is this a natural ordinary technology that must cool down 60 years before being manipulated WITH SPECIAL TOOLS AND GREAT CARE? It will cost billions only for this task to our grand children.
My other point is that we had a choice of upgrading it and use it for another 30 years. The preliminary cost was 1.5 billion. You what? Nuclear wastes were (and still are) buried in concrete blocks to prevent contamination by radiations. The most part of the cost was to re-bury these concrete blocks in larger blocks because the radiations were leaking through them. And as for the giant sarcophagus around the Chernobyl plant, it has to be envelopped in a bigger sarcophagus, again and again, like the concrete blocks of Gentilly II… for centuries, if not millenium. An impossible task that has nothing to do with politics!

This is no ordinary technology, and we don’t really know the ins and outs of this pandora box.

Lustuccc
Well informed means searching beyond the strong censorship pressure done by the concerned industry. The nuclear cover up Is one if not the most censored industry. It is due to their old ties with the military back to the ultra secrecy of the bomb. I have a very interesting and well documented book about the story of the nuclear industry, but it is in French… “Avez-vous peur du nucléaire? Vous devriez” (Do you fear nulear? You should) And remember that a colorless odorless radio-active “spill” is much easier to hide than an oil spill… and oil companies are experts to hide their mess to the public. Even the millions of leaks from the gas extraction, transport and distribution is mostly hidden. This crude gas is SIXTY TIMES more harmfull the the atmosphere than CO²! The nuclear lobby is VERY strong and we must lok up for truth away from the mainstream medias. Here is an appetizer: “http://www.globalresearch.ca/new-book-concludes-chernobyl-death-toll-985-000-mostly-from-cancer/20908 And if you want the truth instead of comforting lies, look up for “The battle of Chernobyl” on youtube. No problemos with nuclear? What do you think will happen when those hundreds of rush erected giant tanks will begin to leak? An earthquake?… Read more »
Lustuccc
Pushmi-Pullyu

Lustuccc said:

“The west coast is already affected, we eat contaminated food. The level of cancers will go up…”

Dude… the black helicopters are coming for you.

And you’re getting spittle on my computer screen.

LusTuCCC

” spittle” Now this is a bit hysterical, isn’t it?
😉

Pushmi-Pullyu

Big Oil thanks you for parroting their anti-nuke propaganda.

Here’s the reality: In the USA alone, the exhaust from coal-fired power plants kill an estimated 15,000 to 30,000 people every year. Obviously the situation is much worse, world-wide (particularly in China). This is accepted as “normal”.

By contrast, the worst nuclear power accident in history, at Chernobyl, is estimated to have killed 4000 people. Just once, not every year!

If people were actually rational, we would decades ago have shut down every single coal-fired power plant and replaced it with a nuclear power plant, putting out clean energy with no CO2 emissions at all.

Sadly, people are not rational, and the news media spreads hysteria about “RADIATION!!” …as if being killed by “invisible” radiation from one of the very rare nuclear accidents would somehow be worse than being killed by “invisible” toxic gasses and carcinogens in coal-fired power plant exhaust, which we all breathe in every day.

NOW MORE NUKES!

Djoni

I like the way you write push me pull you, but the point is if people are so irrational, then how can you exclude yourself.
Sorry, it’s a fail!
People are irrational, that’s why it’s so difficult to know all about everything well.
The nuclear waste problem have been solve?
I would rationaly argue that your reference is contradictory of your view and rather confirm mine and Luslucc.
“Today we stock containers of waste because currently scientists don’t know how to reduce or eliminate the toxicity, but maybe in 100 years perhaps scientists will.”
Reading is rather rational I gess.

mr. M

Around 1.000.000 deaths because of the chernobil accident up to now means ~30.000 deaths/year.

This means coal an nuclear are even…

LusTuCCC

Not at all, as I said, it is easier to hide nuclear leaks because they are colorless and odorless.
http://www.lutins.org/nukes.html

Ambulator

Or maybe Chernobyl will only cause 4000 or so deaths. The estimates are all over the place. Not good, but considering what an old design was used at Chernobyl it doesn’t mean much for the future.

LusTuCCC

I read about TWO million indirect death. Maybe the design is old, but the half-life and extreme long long long long lasting toxic nature of radio-active elements won’t change, neither costs, neither the fact that shiT always happens…

Martin T

Considering most Europeans think It is a big journey visiting a town 10 mins away.
Ev’s can play a much bigger role than they do now :-)_

Carsten

For a journey of 10min by car in Germany I would not even consider any car – whole family on the bikes and it’s done in 30min.
At least all my friends and family in Germany are not that lazy yet.
I love my EV here in the US but the economics in Germany simply don’t play out. There are no subsidies for EV’s to speak off over there.
My family over there pays currently 0.28Euro/kWh and I pay 0.09$/kWh here in the US.
In Germany EV-fuel cost (home charging) run about the same as for a small car but the sticker price is hugely different. The missing charging infrastructure doesn’t help either. Even with an infrastructure, that needs to turn a profit, it will currently not pan out to drive an EV.
I just came back from Germany and went through the exercise with one of my friends whilst over there.

Kalle

Not true tho, i drove 800km this weekend and will drive some 2000 km on thursday.
(From switzerland to sweden)

PVH

Me too 🙂 driving from Lithuania to Luxembourg day after tomorrow; That is 1700 Km. Even if I have a keen interest in EV technology I am glad I have a turbo diesel to do those long trips.

Richard C

Everyone gets it except Toyota.

Kalle

I think That picture of the truck charging road is from sweden

mr. M

Yeah i think so too. Dont know any highway that has overlines in germany. So this is propabbly testground only and the truck is a scania truck (sweden).

Mikael

Nah, it’s a test track in Germany that Scania and Siemens built.
It’s the same kind that Siemens and Scania + a number of other companies relevant to the project will build in Sweden as the first eHighway for commercial use and on public roads.

The swedish track will start building this fall and should be ready next spring, so it’s hard to take any pictures of it yet. 😉

mr. M

Politics…
Merkel will add a little subsidy (~500 to 2000€). The longer range Leaf comes out. Sales increase, viola Merkel subsidy “helped” sell more EVs…

Yeah sure.

Even a €500 subsidy is more than we have today, so I would gladly take it. Once it’s established it should be easier to raise as well.

A big problem is that the conservative Merkel government is only considering subsidies for company cars, not private bought cars.

mr. M

Well maybe we get a new “abwrackprämie” in germany. And no, normally subsidies get reduced not increased after the first setup.