Stop comparing Australia's EV uptake with Norway's

 

REVAi electric vehicles in Oslo, Norway, in 2010. Photo by Mic via Flickr [CC BY 2.0]

Numerous lobby groups, transport journalists, academics, and even political satirists have argued that Australia should follow Norway's example in encouraging the take-up of electric vehicles. 

But even the Secretary General of the Norwegian Electric Vehicle Association admits it would be difficult for other countries to emulate Norway's approach:

Despite the success of Norway’s methods, she doesn’t believe other countries can replicate it like-for-like because their circumstances will be different.

From an Australian perspective, Norway's uptake of electric vehicles is similar to Switzerland's uptake of broadband: a geographically small country with a small population able to quickly take advantage of local particularities - what I have referred to in the past as "varieties of particularism" - which include:

the unique social, political, economic, technological and geographical peculiarities that exist at the nexus of government, business and... technolog[y].

My concept is derived from what Thomas P. Hughes referred to as regional "cultures" in his work Networks of Power: Electrification in Western Society, 1880-1930, which looked at how different regional characteristics led to different systems for generating electricity.

Nevertheless, it is difficult to have a point of view that differs from what I reluctantly refer to as "green-left ideology" about EV policy at the moment, especially when it comes to comparing infrastructure policy with other jurisdictions. I suspect there are powerful industry groups encouraging these approaches, too. But for the green-left, at least, aspiration trumps evidence in all things except tradition and religion, it would seem. 

Nonetheless, there is much more to the EV story.

The front page of The Sydney Morning Herald on 12th May 2021 quotes NSW Planning Minister Rob Stokes, warning:

Although [electric vehicles] are powered by more efficient and sustainable power sources, they are still cars. Painting them green does not change that reality.

Stokes also mentioned that heavier and more "torquey" EVs could potentially release more non-exhaust particulate emissions than conventional vehicles. This issue has been identified by the OECD as an increasingly important public health policy issue as the number of vehicles in cities (of all types) continues to rise.

I am not suggesting that EVs are as polluting as conventional vehicles - far from it. But in addition to particulate emissions, overall emissions depend on how the electricity is generated. 

The majority of Norway's electricity is generated from hydropower (93.4%) with the remainder generated by wind and thermal power. Whereas coal accounts for 75% of Australia's electricity generation, with gas at 16% and the remaining 7% provided by hydro and wind power.

Further, Norway is much smaller than Australia and much wealthier on a per capita basis. Canada provides a much better "fit" in terms of the "most similar" method of comparison on geographical, cultural, and political grounds. The table below indicates the differences between all three countries on these measures:

Comparison of Norway, Australia and Canada. Data sources below.

Australia and Canada are similar on the most basic demographic statistics, and Norway is no bigger or more densely populated than greater Sydney but it is substantially wealthier with greater access to Europe's EV market. 

Canada has its own EV manufacturing industry and is not subject to the same restrictions that Norway is likely to face in the near future if Europe's EV market contracts. On the other hand, Australia has an issue with supply and consumer choice in EVs which is likely to be exacerbated by important issues arising from the pandemic.

Can the less than 1% uptake of EVs in Australia and Canada be the result of a lack government incentives? Canada has introduced federal cash rebates to promote EV sales, yet the uptake in Canada is not expected to meet federal targets set for 2025. To argue that government incentives alone is the problem is to draw a long bow.

One of the major issues for the EV industry, especially in large, sparsely populated countries like Australia and Canada, is consumers' perceptions of EV's range. 

Research conducted by KPMG in Canada found that EV purchases were motivated primarily by environmental concerns and lower operating costs. While incentives for purchasing EVs were desirable, other concerns about the higher purchase cost, reliability of batteries, long charging times, and doubts about the ability to travel long distances and access to relevant charging infrastructure were the major reasons motorists were reluctant to purchase an EV. 

The Electric Vehicle Council of Australia arrived at similar findings to the Canadian experience. Of note is "range anxiety", with some 79% of consumers estimating the average range of EVs to be well under 400km. The EV Council suggests that ranges can vary from 260km to 650km. But this is significantly less than the ranges of most modern conventional vehicles.

Range anxiety is very real in Australia and Canada with both countries ranking in the top five longest national highways in the world. 

Most importantly, however, is that traffic congestion in Norway is still a major concern, with the supply of roads confirming the old adage that increasing the supply of roads leads to increasing demand. This issue alone more than justifies NSW Planning Minister Rob Stokes' concerns about EVs.

I am not against EVs and I have no interest in hindering their uptake. But comparing Australia with Norway is oversimplified, unjustified, and inherently lacking in rigour. If we were to take Canada as a more appropriate example, then there is much more than just policy at play.

Until "range anxiety" can be ameliorated by improvements in EV technology and EV-ready infrastructure (especially for fast recharging), then those who rely on long-distance car travel are unlikely to be persuaded to buy an EV.

The logical conclusion in the short run, then, is that government subsidisation is likely to benefit the relative few by contributing to traffic congestion at taxpayers' expense (and indeed without contributing to the fuel excise) until EV technology improves.

In Australia, EVs are not the panacea for greenhouse gas emissions and may actually contribute to them if EV charging increases demand on Australia's predominantly non-renewables electricity generation system.

To add insult to injury, subsidising EV ownership without incorporating an appropriate road user charge will only exacerbate the problem of traffic congestion. In this regard, Victoria is on the right track.

For NSW, Transport Minister Andrew Constance is in a difficult position and must deal with the EV lobby while also fitting in with Planning Minister Stokes' and NSW Treasurer Dominic Perrottet's plans to introduce a distance-based tax on EVs.

Politics will decide the outcome and it will not be neat and tidy. In the meantime, looking to Norway is unlikely to address the real reasons behind Australia's slow uptake of EVs. 

Data Sources

Australian Statistics: 

Australian Bureau of Statistics (2020). Motor Vehicle Census, Australia. See: https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/industry/tourism-and-transport/motor-vehicle-census-australia/latest-release.

Schmidt, B. (2020). How many electric cars are there in Australia, and where are they? The Driven. See: https://thedriven.io/2020/12/23/how-many-electric-cars-are-there-in-australia-and-where-are-they/.

Canadian Statistics:

Electric Autonomy (2021). New Canadian EV sales figures from Statistics Canada show strong recovery in Q3 2020, following sharp lockdown dip. See: https://electricautonomy.ca/2021/02/11/canadian-ev-sales-data-q3-2020/.

Statistics Canada (2020). Automotive Statistics. See: https://www.statcan.gc.ca/eng/topics-start/automotive.

Statistics Canada (2021). Zero-emission vehicles in Canada, third quarter of 2020. See: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/11-627-m/11-627-m2021012-eng.htm.

Norwegian Statistics:

Statistics Norway (2021). Registered Vehicles. See: https://www.ssb.no/en/transport-og-reiseliv/landtransport/statistikk/bilparken

On Finding One's Tribe

Percy Family Coat of Arms, circa 1067.

Twice now I have entered a random question into Google. And twice now Wanderlust has produced the result I needed. Last time I was searching to reset my inner compass. This time it was about finding my tribe.

It isn't so much about finding a group of people to hang out with, but rather to feel that my work is valued and not subjected to unwarranted criticism from people who live by their ideology.

I am talking about writing an article for a journal where the topic is controversial. The point of such articles is to stimulate debate. But only if that debate is in the "correct" direction as stipulated by the ideologues, it seems.

I had a similar situation in the examination of my PhD, where one examiner suggested that I resubmit my thesis that compared the impact of the institutional frameworks that govern communications technologies (the independent variable) with the outcomes in terms of penetration (the dependent variable) in Canada and Australia. My examiner suggested that my "new" thesis should be on why the NBN was the most innovative thing ever. My findings disagreed.

Then I had my other examiner who took my major finding, modified it, and published it before my thesis had even been accepted. At least it was acknowledged but WTAF? These people are not scholars. They are the same people who give my students 5/10 with feedback like: "A bit bland". I am getting sick of it.

And then to have two reviewers who obviously disagreed so much with my controversial ideas that instead of allowing the article to stand as a controversy, decided that they would write their own responses to my controversial article as part of my rejection feedback. 

I know that being rejected is par for the course but in this case it was so clearly a case of ideological difference that I won't bother submitting to this journal ever again.

So where to from here?

I have asked for some guidance from my mentors, and this has led me to reflect a little more on where I want to go. I realise that I want my work to matter in a practical sense and to contribute to my sense of a "virtue proposition", along the lines of my teaching practice, which has become more focused on developing my students' social capital. 

To do so, I will have to rethink where I associate. To find my own tribe, so to speak.

The first thing is to realise that where I get my ideas from does not have to conform to traditional left-leaning sources. Indeed, I am finding more and more solace in the great books of the western world the more I read for myself. Much like Harold Bloom, I am no longer interested in apologising for this approach.

Seneca would take it where he could get it. Here is his approach in Letters from a Stoic, Letter II:

My thought for today is something which I found in Epicurus (yes, I actually make a practice going over to the enemy’s camp – by way of reconnaissance, not as a deserter!). ‘A cheerful poverty,’ he says, ‘is an honourable state.’

I have often followed Seneca's approach subconsciously but there is a point where we either back ourselves, or continue to bend in the wind of others' stuff. I've had a long run of not trusting myself for whatever reason, at least intellectually, while at the same time stubbornly backing myself subconsciously and only realising afterwards I was reaping the rewards for sticking to my guns.

It is interesting that these issues have arisen at a time when I am encouraging my students to make their subconscious habits more conscious so they may live the Socratic ideal; or, the examined life. I tend to learn the most from teaching and this time is no exception.

As I approach the end of the semester where I will finish by encouraging my students to become "reflective practitioners", I find myself (yet again) learning my own lessons.

What strikes me about the advice on finding one's tribe presented on Wanderlust is that "trying new things" doesn't have to mean yoga or tree-hugging; it can mean trying a free market think tank. It can mean returning to my conservative roots challenged long ago and now but a distant memory. 

It doesn't have  to be politically correct and it can even mean listening to Jordan Peterson if I choose to.

While it may be a case of coming full circle, I realise that I have only one life. And the purpose of that life is to live it. I've tried the unicorns and lollipops way, and it is not for me. It pretends to do good while doing nothing. 

I've listened to others' views about how certain politicians are "the hope for our children" while these same politicians do nothing but complain. I've also seen politicians working themselves into the ground while keyboard warriors sit in the stands and troll and critique.

From now on, I am the man in the arena. And I will choose the arena. If the audience doesn't like it, that is none of my business.

 

On Writer's Courage: Perplexing Reflection

Sunset over Lake Pejar, NSW. Photo by Dr Michael de Percy

 

No Matter Our Wreckage by Gemma Carey
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

I've met the author a couple of times and we follow each other on twitter. I bought this memoire on Kindle recently and once I started, I couldn’t stop. I usually write notes on my blog about every book I read but this one made me double-check. It was only yesterday when talking to my students about developing a professional online presence and I mentioned how Gemma Carey had gone against the academic grain with her book that I realised how courageous she is in publishing this story. While it was far less courageous, B.F. Skinner took a similar approach decades ago and was admonished for writing a novel (Walden Two), despite its own type of brilliance.

I think the book is very courageous and has challenged my thinking on multiple levels. I don’t know where to go from here, but I suppose that is the importance of the book. After days of reflection, I am still at a loss as to “where to from here?” But I hope my perplexity honours the work sufficiently for now.

View all my reviews