Will the German electric-mobility package deliver? An assessment of - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
will the german electric mobility package deliver
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Will the German electric-mobility package deliver? An assessment of - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Jan 29, 2024 256 likes •602 views

Will the German electric-mobility package deliver? An assessment of the policy objective to reach 1 million electric cars in 2020 Infraday Berlin, October 8 th , 2011 Giselmar Hemmert Michael Holtermann Dr. Jerome Massiani Jrg Radeke Dr.

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Will the German electric-mobility package deliver?

An assessment of the policy objective to reach 1 million electric cars in 2020

Infraday Berlin, October 8th, 2011 Giselmar Hemmert Michael Holtermann

  • Dr. Jerome Massiani

Jörg Radeke

  • Dr. Jens Weinmann
slide-2
SLIDE 2

1

Disclaimer

The opinions and findings of this research solely reflect the personal views of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views, positions, strategies or opinions

  • f the German environmental ministry (BMU)
slide-3
SLIDE 3

2

Agenda

Introduction Methodology Policy Example Findings and Conclusions

slide-4
SLIDE 4

3

Agenda

Introduction Methodology Policy Example Findings and Conclusions

slide-5
SLIDE 5

4

How can electric mobility be part of a transition to a more sustainable transport in Germany?

ESMT project financed by the German environmental ministry within the framework of the stimulus package „Konjunkturpaket II" Research questions

  • What are the long-term economic and environmental

costs and benefits of different policy instruments to foster and promote electric mobility?

  • What are the long-term infrastructure needs to

achieve sustainable transport with the integration of electric vehicles?

  • Which overall growth and employment effects will
  • ccur in different scenarios?
slide-6
SLIDE 6

5

Model overview

Car Industry Energy Sector Car Market Cost Benefit Analysis Government

slide-7
SLIDE 7

6

Agenda

Introduction Methodology Policy Example Findings and Conclusions

slide-8
SLIDE 8

7

Car industry – manufacturers try to find an optimal response to regulatory changes

Assumptions

  • Perfect competition
  • Prototypical supplier
  • 9 technologies and 11 size segments

Implementation in MMEM

  • Price setting

− Dynamic price setting − Smaller segments less profitable than larger ones

  • Strategic cost minimisation

− Manufacturer considers optimal response to CAFE standards (EU regulation 443) by improving ICE technologies − Or, alternatively, paying fines

  • Gasoline
  • Diesel
  • Hybrid
  • LPG/CNG

Propulsion technologies

  • BEV
  • PHEV
  • REV
  • Biofuels
  • Hydrogen

Car Industry Energy Sector Car Market Cost Benefit Analysis Government

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Car industry constantly re-considers its options

Regulation (EC) 443/2009: Fines Optimisation costs

The optimal solution depends

  • n the number of

xEV

Willingness to Pay for Fuel Efficiency

slide-10
SLIDE 10

9

Car market – Discrete choice model determines purchase probability

Car industry Energy Car market Cost-Benefit Analysis Government

General setting

  • Discrete Choice (Random Utility Maximisation) paradigm.
  • Elements of TCO and Bass diffusion
  • Strong disaggregation:

− Markets (household, non household with further decomposition) − Consumer heterogeneity − 9 technologies − 11 segments (KBA) Implementation in MMEM

  • Discrete Choice Model

− Based on car attributes (fuel costs, range, etc.). − Behavioural parameters based on metaanalysis of SP (Conjoint Analysis). − Nested Logit Structure.

  • Bass Diffusion
slide-11
SLIDE 11

Existing models – methodologies

Endogenesisation Disaggregation Vision CA R M I Aecom (au) A.E.A (at) Stroben MIT DLR TAFV AVID MIT TU delft MMEM Spreadsheet models Simplified DCM Bass diffusion Micro-economic Models Agent Based

slide-12
SLIDE 12

PHEV and RE to dominate electric mobility

Annual new registrations, million units

Quelle: ES MT MMEM (2011) 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 Million units Diesel Benzin Hybrid LPG/CNG Biofuel Wasserstoff BEV PHEV RE

slide-13
SLIDE 13

EV propulsion becomes mass market by 2030

S

  • urce: ES

MT MMEM (2011)

Vehicle stock, million units

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Findings

13

Electric mobility (via hybrid propulsion concepts) to become competitive by 2020 – even without policy support. A low range, a lack of quick charging infrastructure, high purchase costs mean only a low uptake of pure BEV in the foreseeable future. Car buyers are myopic as they overvalue the purchase price and underestimate future operating costs – that hinders the adoption of fuel efficient technologies 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

slide-15
SLIDE 15

14

Agenda

Introduction Methodology Policy Example Findings and Conclusions

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Policy support can speed up EV market penetration…

15

slide-17
SLIDE 17

B ereich Konsumenten Nettgegenwarts- wert in M io. € Produzenten Nettgegenwarts- wert in M io. € Staat Nettgegenwarts- wert in M io. € Umwelt Nettgegenwarts- wert in M io. € Rest der Welt Nettgegenwarts- wert in M io. € Fahrzeug- kauf Konsumenten- wohlfahrt Fahrzeugkauf 1 ,988 € Produzentenrente Fahrzeugkauf

  • 68 €

Direkte Kosten der Politikmaßnahme

  • 349 €

Produzentenwohl- fahrt Fahrzeugkauf (Ausland)

  • 781

€ Treibstoff- ausgaben Konsumenten- wohlfahrt Treibstoffkosten

  • 997 €

Produzentenrente Treibstoffher- stellung und Vertrieb

  • 62 €

Steuereinkommen M ineralölsteuer

  • 484 €

CO2 Umweltschaden 1 57 € Produzenten- wohlfahrt Treib- stoff (Ausland)

  • 450 €

Produzentenrente Elektrizitätsher- stellung und Vertrieb 59 € Steuereinkommen Energiesteuer 54 € Andere Umweltschäden 56 € CO2 Vermeidungs- kosten Elektrizitätssektor

  • 65 €

Regulierung 443 Strafzahlungen

  • 3 €

KfZ-Steuer KfZ- Steuerzahlungen

  • 41

7 € KfZ- Steuereinkommen 41 7 € Infra- struktur Ausgaben für Ladestationen

  • 1

81 € Bereitstellung Ladestationen 1 5 € Netzausbau- investitionen

  • 382 €

Netzausbau- investitionen 36 € Politik- kosten Schattenkosten durch Staatsausgaben 79 € Schattenkosten durch Staatsausgaben 1 33 € Einnahmen Umsatzsteuer

  • 339 €

Gesamt Netto- gegenwarts- wert Stakeholder Gesamt Netto- gegenwartswert Konsumenten 90 € Gesamt Netto- gegenwartswert Produzenten 48 € Gesamt Netto- gegenwartswert Staat

  • 705 €

Gesamt Netto- gegenwartswert Umwelt 214 € Gesamt Netto- gegenwartswert Rest der Welt

  • 1,231 €

Gesamt Netto- gegenwartswert der Politikmaßnahme

  • 353 €

Rest der Welt (kein Bestandteil der inländischen Kosten-Nutzen Bilanz) Stakeho ldergruppe 16

S

  • urce: ES

MT MMEM (2011)

…but the costs to society may outweigh the benefits

NPV 2012-2025 in € Million

slide-18
SLIDE 18

17

S

  • urce: ES

MT MMEM (2011)

B ereich Konsumenten Nettgegenwarts- wert in M io. € Produzenten Nettgegenwarts- wert in M io. € Staat Nettgegenwarts- wert in M io. € Umwelt Nettgegenwarts- wert in M io. € Rest der Welt Nettgegenwarts- wert in M io. € Fahrzeug- kauf Konsumenten- wohlfahrt Fahrzeugkauf 1 ,988 € Produzentenrente Fahrzeugkauf

  • 68 €

Direkte Kosten der Politikmaßnahme

  • 349 €

Produzentenwohl- fahrt Fahrzeugkauf (Ausland)

  • 781

€ Treibstoff- ausgaben Konsumenten- wohlfahrt Treibstoffkosten

  • 997 €

Produzentenrente Treibstoffher- stellung und Vertrieb

  • 62 €

Steuereinkommen M ineralölsteuer

  • 484 €

CO2 Umweltschaden 1 57 € Produzenten- wohlfahrt Treib- stoff (Ausland)

  • 450 €

Produzentenrente Elektrizitätsher- stellung und Vertrieb 59 € Steuereinkommen Energiesteuer 54 € Andere Umweltschäden 56 € CO2 Vermeidungs- kosten Elektrizitätssektor

  • 65 €

Regulierung 443 Strafzahlungen

  • 3 €

KfZ-Steuer KfZ- Steuerzahlungen

  • 41

7 € KfZ- Steuereinkommen 41 7 € Infra- struktur Ausgaben für Ladestationen

  • 1

81 € Bereitstellung Ladestationen 1 5 € Netzausbau- investitionen

  • 382 €

Netzausbau- investitionen 36 € Politik- kosten Schattenkosten durch Staatsausgaben 79 € Schattenkosten durch Staatsausgaben 1 33 € Einnahmen Umsatzsteuer

  • 339 €

Gesamt Netto- gegenwarts- wert Stakeholder Gesamt Netto- gegenwartswert Konsumenten 90 € Gesamt Netto- gegenwartswert Produzenten 48 € Gesamt Netto- gegenwartswert Staat

  • 705 €

Gesamt Netto- gegenwartswert Umwelt 214 € Gesamt Netto- gegenwartswert Rest der Welt

  • 1,231 €

Gesamt Netto- gegenwartswert der Politikmaßnahme

  • 353 €

Rest der Welt (kein Bestandteil der inländischen Kosten-Nutzen Bilanz) Stakeho ldergruppe

  • 1. Purchase incentive and declining cost of optimisation
  • 2. Fuel cost increase – despite higher EV share
  • 3. Less efficient cars pay more road tax
  • 4. Additional infrastructure is required
  • 5. On balance positive for consumers – yet for the wrong reasons

Consumers benefit from lower purchase expenditure

S

  • urce: ES

MT MMEM (2011)

NPV in € Million

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Subsidising EVs reduces manufacturers‘ incentive to optimise conventional vehicles

S

  • urce: ES

MT MMEM (2011)

ICE vehicle efficiency declines

slide-20
SLIDE 20

B ereich Produzenten Nettgegenwarts- wert in M io. € Staat Nettgegenwarts- wert in M io. € Umwelt Nettgegenwarts- wert in M io. € Rest der Welt Nettgegenwarts- wert in M io. € Fahrzeug- kauf Produzentenrente Fahrzeugkauf

  • 68 €

Direkte Kosten der Politikmaßnahme

  • 349 €

Produzentenwohl- fahrt Fahrzeugkauf (Ausland)

  • 781

€ Treibstoff- ausgaben Produzentenrente Treibstoffher- stellung und Vertrieb

  • 62 €

Steuereinkommen M ineralölsteuer

  • 484 €

CO2 Umweltschaden 1 57 € Produzenten- wohlfahrt Treib- stoff (Ausland)

  • 450 €

Produzentenrente Elektrizitätsher- stellung und Vertrieb 59 € Steuereinkommen Energiesteuer 54 € Andere Umweltschäden 56 € CO2 Vermeidungs- kosten Elektrizitätssektor

  • 65 €

Regulierung 443 Strafzahlungen

  • 3 €

KfZ-Steuer KfZ- Steuereinkommen 41 7 € Infra- struktur Bereitstellung Ladestationen 1 5 € Netzausbau- investitionen 36 € Politik- kosten Schattenkosten durch Staatsausgaben 1 33 € Einnahmen Umsatzsteuer

  • 339 €

Gesamt Netto- gegenwarts- wert Stakeholder Gesamt Netto- gegenwartswert Produzenten 48 € Gesamt Netto- gegenwartswert Staat

  • 705 €

Gesamt Netto- gegenwartswert Umwelt 214 € Gesamt Netto- gegenwartswert Rest der Welt

  • 1,231 €

Rest der Welt (kein Bestandteil der inländischen Kosten-Nutzen Bilanz) Stakeho ldergruppe 19

S

  • urce: ES

MT MMEM (2011)

Impact on producers is moderate

  • 1. Less optimisation means less value added
  • 2. Demand for fossil fuel declines…
  • 3. …while electricity demand and abatement costs increase
  • 4. Industry provides infrastructure
  • 5. On balance also positive for producers

NPV in € Million

S

  • urce: ES

MT MMEM (2011)

slide-21
SLIDE 21

B ereich Staat Nettgegenwarts- wert in M io. € Fahrzeug- kauf Direkte Kosten der Politikmaßnahme

  • 349 €

Treibstoff- ausgaben Steuereinkommen M ineralölsteuer

  • 484 €

Steuereinkommen Energiesteuer 54 € Regulierung 443 Strafzahlungen

  • 3 €

KfZ-Steuer KfZ- Steuereinkommen 41 7 € Infra- struktur Politik- kosten Einnahmen Umsatzsteuer

  • 339 €

Gesamt Netto- gegenwarts- wert Stakeholder Gesamt Netto- gegenwartswert Staat

  • 705 €

Stakeho ldergruppe 20

S

  • urce: ES

MT MMEM (2011)

  • 1. Direct policy costs (discounted)
  • 2. More EVs mean less fuel tax – despite rebound effect from ICE

technologies

  • 3. Energy tax on electricity can not compensate the loss
  • 4. Road tax increase mitigates some of the effects
  • 5. VAT revenue loss
  • 5. On balance a net costs for the government

Government: Subsidy costs and tax loss outweigh the benefits

NPV in € Million

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Policy measure fails to produce net benefits in the long run

NPV in € Million

S

  • urce: ES

MT MMEM (2011)

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Findings

22

Electric mobility (via hybrid propulsion concepts) to become competitive by 2020 – even without policy support. A low range, a lack of quick charging infrastructure, high purchase costs mean only a low uptake of pure BEV in the foreseeable future. Effects of EV policies will be generally driven by regulatory context and will often produce negative net benefits. Car buyers are myopic as they overvalue the purchase price and underestimate future operating costs – that hinders the adoption of fuel efficient technologies 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

slide-24
SLIDE 24

CO2 Balance improves – Savings would be higher without the impact from De-optimisation

S

  • urce: ES

MT MMEM (2011)

CO2 Emissions, million tonnes

Cumulative savings equal 0.2%

  • f total emissions from

passenger cars

slide-25
SLIDE 25

Findings

24

Electric mobility (via hybrid propulsion concepts) to become competitive by 2020 – even without policy support. A low range, a lack of quick charging infrastructure, high purchase costs mean only a low uptake of pure BEV in the foreseeable future. Effects of EV policies will be generally driven by regulatory context and will often produce negative net benefits. Effects of EVs on emissions will be ambiguous and counter intuitive. Car buyers are myopic as they overvalue the purchase price and underestimate future operating costs – that hinders the adoption of fuel efficient technologies 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

slide-26
SLIDE 26

Fossil fuel consumption declines by 50% until 2030…

Fuel consumption in billion litres

  • 50%

S

  • urce: ES

MT MMEM (2011)

slide-27
SLIDE 27

…generating annual reductions of 55 million tonnes CO2

Passenger cars CO2 emission factors (LHS), Annual emissions (RHS)

CO2 g/ km S

  • urce: ES

MT MMEM (2011)

slide-28
SLIDE 28

…eroding the basis of fuel taxation

Annual fuel tax revenues, passenger cars, € billions

27

Energy tax on electricity can‘ t compensate tax loss

S

  • urce: ES

MT MMEM (2011)

slide-29
SLIDE 29

Findings

28

Electric mobility (via hybrid propulsion concepts) to become competitive by 2020 – even without policy support. A low range, a lack of quick charging infrastructure, high purchase costs mean only a low uptake of pure BEV in the foreseeable future. Effects of EV policies will be generally driven by regulatory context and will often produce negative net benefits. Effects of EVs on emissions will be ambiguous and counter intuitive. Car buyers are myopic as they overvalue the purchase price and underestimate future operating costs – that hinders the adoption of fuel efficient technologies A fuel-based taxation of mobility will see its tax base erode. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

slide-30
SLIDE 30

29

Agenda

Introduction Methodology Policy Example Findings and Conclusions

slide-31
SLIDE 31

Findings

30

Electric mobility (via hybrid propulsion concepts) to become competitive by 2020 – even without policy support. A low range, a lack of quick charging infrastructure, high purchase costs mean only a low uptake of pure BEV in the foreseeable future. Effects of EV policies will be generally driven by regulatory context and will often produce negative net benefits. Effects of EVs on emissions will be ambiguous and counter intuitive. Car buyers are myopic as they overvalue the purchase price and underestimate future operating costs – that hinders the adoption of fuel efficient technologies A fuel-based taxation of mobility will see its tax base erode. Subsidising private charging infrastructure is not an efficient policy option. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

slide-32
SLIDE 32

31

Disclaimer

The opinions and findings of this research solely reflect the personal views of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views, positions, strategies or opinions

  • f the German environmental ministry (BMU)
slide-33
SLIDE 33

Backup