- Your history
China moves at a higher speed than Belgium
In Belgium we talk a lot about the idea, in China hey act: TheNew York Times has an articleabout the Chinese plan to advance big time in electric and hybrid vehicles:
China’s intention, in addition to creating a world-leading industry that will produce jobs and exports, is to reduce urban pollution and decrease its dependence on oil, which comes from the Mideast and travels over sea routes controlled by the
United States Navy
.
But electric vehicles may do little to clear the country’s smog-darkened sky or curb its rapidly rising emissions of
global warming
gases. China gets three-fourths of its electricity from coal, which produces more soot and more greenhouse gases than other fuels.
A report by McKinsey & Company last autumn estimated that replacing a gasoline-powered car with a similar-size electric car in China would reduce greenhouse emissions by only 19 percent. It would reduce urban pollution, however, by shifting the source of smog from car exhaust pipes to power plants, which are often located outside cities.
Beyond manufacturing, subsidies of up to $8,800 are being offered to taxi fleets and local government agencies in 13 Chinese cities for each hybrid or all-electric vehicle they purchase. The state electricity grid has been ordered to set up electric car charging stations in Beijing, Shanghai and Tianjin.
Government research subsidies for electric car designs are increasing rapidly. And an interagency panel is planning tax credits for consumers who buy alternative energy vehicles.
China wants to raise its annual production capacity to 500,000 hybrid or all-electric cars and buses by the end of 2011, from 2,100 last year, government officials and Chinese auto executives said. By comparison, CSM Worldwide, a consulting firm that does forecasts for automakers, predicts that Japan and South Korea together will be producing 1.1 million hybrid or all-electric light vehicles by then and North America will be making 267,000.
3 Comments
-
frederic
On 2 Apr, 2009
Zelfs een kind ziet dus dat om te anticiperen op de toekomst er staatssturing moet zijn in de vorm van subsidies/taxatie en dat een vrije markt systeem altijd te laat komt omdat mensen nu eenmaal kortischtige wezens zijn
-
Theo
On 2 Apr, 2009
Free market is: the US and NATO are busy driving the price of oil through the roof, while China is exploring the cobalt and phosphate mines in Africa... while we are lecturing both China and Africa on democracy!
Yep, Tianjin is the battery capital of the world and it has its own Khan, Wan Gang (funny how Americans have a Tsar for everything now... who would have thought that possible!).
China does this in 2 years.
It takes us how many years to just come up with the plan for de Lange Dapper?
they don't need to spend the millions on the PR and the Comm for the project... they actually do a very good job giving people what they want
I'll have whatever Tianjin Khan Wan Gang is having!
"BYD has 5,000 auto engineers and an equal number of battery engineers, most of them living at its headquarters in Shenzhen in a cluster of 15 yellow apartment buildings, each 18 stories high. Young engineers earn less than $600 a month, including benefits."
PS: President Obama gave the Queen an iPod
do we think the Canadian PM gave her a BlackBerry? -
Frank
On 2 Apr, 2009
@Frederic
"Zelfs een kind ziet dus dat om te anticiperen op de toekomst er staatssturing moet zijn "
Op wat exact is de staat aan het anticiperen? CO2 uitstoot? Groene schok? Olie schok?
Als regeringsleiders er zo nodig zijn om te anticiperen, waarom hebben ze dan niet geanticipeerd op de huidige deflationaire ineenstorting? Of op het opwarmingsprobleem? Of op de veel te hoge leveragegraad bij banken? Zelfs een kind ziet dat staatssturing grandioos gefaald heeft!
Mijns inziens kan de staat nog niet eens anticiperen op een onweer als ze getroffen worden door een bliksem.
PS: Om de groene schok op te vangen gaan we elektrisch rijden subsidiëren en de verminderde CO2 uitstoot dik in de verf zetten. Geen haai die kraait over de CO2 uitstoot van de elktriciteitscentrales op steenkool en het feit dat China dit enkel doet omdat het over grote steenkoolreserves beschikt en weinig olie (en uiteraard ook zijn elektrische wagens aan de rest van de planeet wil verkopen). Zullen we dat maar onder de noemer "subtiel protectionisme" plaatsen?
















