Credit for electric cars is unusually well-made columns

It is not true that the new subsidy for the purchase of electric vehicles will only benefit the rich. I don’t care if it were.

That’s because the point of the $7,500 tax credit is to accelerate the transition to clean energy. This is not to enrich those who can afford the most technologically superior cars. It’s not to help American automakers sell more of them, though if that’s the result, great. The point is to prevent the planet from burning.

Many on the right like to take their eyes off the bigger picture. At FoxNews.com, David Marcus called the credit “a grand EV subsidy.” He says that giving potential buyers a $7,500 credit is “like giving everybody a thousand dollar gift card to a Rolex store, great, but where are we going to get the other 9 grand?”

Well, either you get another 9 grand, or you don’t get a Rolex. Life is unfair.

It seems that the author issued his complaints before there was a finished piece of legislation to complain about. The Inflation Reduction Act denies the credit to single filers ($300,000 as a joint filer) with taxable income above $150,000. In other words, the really rich don’t get it.

There is some muttering on the left that not everyone has been handed a shiny new EV. Tamara Sheldon declares in Knowable Magazine that she prefers to buy an EV but the cheapest one is at least three times more expensive than her used VW Jetta. We’re not told how (SET ITAL) used (END ITAL) the Jetta is, but you still need some money to buy a new electric car, right?

Critics would support their argument if they stopped portraying the $60,000 Cadillac Lyriq or Model Y Tesla as typical EVs. Car and Driver helpfully lists more affordable models. The Chevrolet Bolt EV, for example, starts at $32,495.

Buying an electric vehicle can have a high upfront cost, but the gasoline savings can make EVs much less expensive over time. For example, driving a fossil-fuel-powered Ford F-150 pickup 15,000 miles would cost the owner $2,900 at current gas prices. The same 15,000 miles on the electric Ford F-150 Lightning Pro will come in at $950. Obviously, the more you drive it, the better the deal.

It seems important that hecklers exaggerate the environmental concerns associated with EVs. Marcus on Fox notes that you often need fossil fuels to make the electricity that goes into batteries. As he puts it, “The electricity that drives these futuristic vehicles will not flow freely from the sky.”

In fact, it does a lot. For biblical scholars, wind and sun are like manna from heaven. They are free and provide what we hunger for, clean power. Renewable energy, including hydropower, produces about 21% of our total electricity. The U.S. Energy Information Administration predicts that number will reach 44 percent by 2050, and that number could drop. According to the International Energy Agency, with jobs, renewable energy could produce 90 percent of the world’s electricity by 2050.

Another good thing about electric vehicles: zero tailpipe emissions. We refer to the harmful chemicals that belch forth when burning fossil fuels. In other words, old-fashioned smoke.

If bashing Democrats is the true motive behind all this whining about the EV tax credit, too bad. Now political players have to work in the interest of the country even if they agree with the other side.

As policy initiatives go, this incentive to move Americans to electric vehicles is unusually well-crafted. good job

Follow Froma Harrop on Twitter @FromaHarrop. He can be reached at [email protected] To learn more about Froma Harrop and read features from other Creators writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators webpage at www.creators.com.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.