Booming electric car sales under fire in Norway

Aug 31, 2014 by Pierre-Henry Deshayes
Electric cars crowd the bus lane (L) during the morning rush hour towards Oslo at Hoevik, August 19, 2014

Ministers in Norway—a major and rich oil-producing country—are under increasing public pressure to reduce perks and tax breaks for booming electric car sales.

"It's become a problem," said Erik Haugstad, a bus driver in the Oslo region who complains about the numerous clogging bus lanes, which they have the right to use in Norway.

The cars are also exempt from urban toll payments or fees at public parking spaces, where they can recharge batteries without cost.

But above all, they are exempt from Norway's sky high sales taxes and VAT.

Norway brought in the generous incentives to cut back on greenhouse gas emissions from traffic, which accounts for 10 percent of total emissions in the Nordic nation.

The policy has been so successful that 32,000 electric cars are now on the road—by far the highest rate per capita in the world, in a country with a 5.1 million population.

"I'm a and I want to transport my passengers as quickly as possible. So, I'd like electric cars to leave the bus lanes, where they're getting in my way," Haugstad said.

"These delays have a cost for society. Time lost by thousands of our passengers in traffic is far greater than that gained by a few dozen electric car drivers."

He said the cars can create a vicious circle—tired of being stuck in traffic, bus users could be tempted to buy an electric car themselves, worsening the congestion problem.

13 percent of sales

Electric cars already represent 85 percent of traffic in bus lanes during rush hour, according to a study by the Norwegian Public Roads Administration on a busy stretch of road outside Oslo.

The plugs of charging cars are seen in free parking spaces for electric cars in central Oslo on August 19, 2014

"It's a subject we discuss very often with colleagues during lunch break. Many of them are far more aggressive and don't measure their words as much as me," Haugstad said.

No decision has been made so far, but it looks increasingly likely that authorities will take action to unclog congested areas—especially during rush hour.

In the meantime, electric car sales keep growing. From the popular Leaf by Japan's Nissan to high-end US-made Tesla S, they have accounted for 13 percent of new car sales since the beginning of 2014, far ahead of the rest of the world.

In March, the Tesla became the highest selling car in a single month in Norway's history, despite its relatively high price.

Although a basic model costs about 60,000 euros ($79,000), it still sounds like a bargain considering that a price including taxes would be roughly double.

The popularity of electric cars has caught the authorities off guard, as they expected to keep the incentives in place until 2017, or until they number 50,000.

At the current pace, that figure could be reached in the beginning of 2015, forcing the government to rethink its costly policy.

Cars are seen charging in free parking spaces for electric cars in central Oslo on August 19, 2014

The tax exemptions alone account for up to 4 billion kroner (500 million euros, $650 million), according to the state's own estimates.

"We might make lowering adjustments in the future," Prime Minister Erna Solberg recently told Norwegian newspaper VG.

"But I can promise drivers that there will still be fiscal advantages to driving an electric car."

The commitment is important, because 48 percent of electric car owners say their main reason for buying them was to save money.

According to a survey by the Norwegian Electric Vehicle Association, only 27 percent said it was for environmental reasons and 12 percent to gain time in their rides.

"It's too early to remove the fiscal incentives. The market isn't competitive enough yet" compared to that of fossil-fuel-driven cars, said Christina Bu, general secretary of the association.

"If the tax and VAT exemption ends, the market could collapse and it would be hard for Norway to reach its climate goals. We must increase the number of electric cars, not reduce it."

Explore further: Tesla, Chinese firm plan 400 charging stations

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Norway warms to electric cars

Nov 18, 2013

Following the example of their crown prince, thousands of Norwegians have switched to electric cars, taking advantage of strong and somewhat controversial government incentives.

Electric cars take off in Norway

May 10, 2011

They speed past gas guzzlers in traffic, ignore congestion charges and get city centre parking for free. In a country whose wealth is fuelled by oil, Oslo has become the world capital of the electric car.

Tesla, Chinese firm plan 400 charging stations

Aug 29, 2014

Tesla Motors Co. and a state-owned Chinese phone carrier announced plans Friday to build 400 charging stations for electric cars in a new bid to promote popular adoption of the technology in China.

Recommended for you

The state of shale

15 hours ago

University of Pittsburgh researchers have shared their findings from three studies related to shale gas in a recent special issue of the journal Energy Technology, edited by Götz Veser, the Nickolas A. DeCecco Professor of Che ...

Website shines light on renewable energy resources

Dec 18, 2014

A team from the University of Arizona and eight southwestern electric utility companies have built a pioneering web portal that provides insight into renewable energy sources and how they contribute to the ...

Better software cuts computer energy use

Dec 18, 2014

An EU research project is developing tools to help software engineers create energy-efficient code, which could reduce electricity consumption at data centres by up to 50% and improve battery life in smart ...

Cook farm waste into energy

Dec 17, 2014

It takes some cooking, but turning farm waste into biofuels is now possible and makes economic sense, according to preliminary research from the University of Guelph.

User comments : 54

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

BSD
3.9 / 5 (8) Aug 31, 2014
The quicker the backs of the oil companies are broken the better off everyone will be.

I want to see the Middle East herding goats again, rather that funding terrorism with oil dollars.
antialias_physorg
4.7 / 5 (3) Aug 31, 2014
You are aware thatthe west funded
- Saddam Hussein
- Osama Bin Laden
- Ayatollah Kohemeini
- ...
?

Funding terrorism is not exactly a prerogative of Middel Easter Countries. It seems to be something people with too much cash on their hands are wont to do (to get more cash...nothing makes money better than selling weapons to nefarious groups and thereby making people afraid...causiongthem to shout for more weapons)

..probably the whole reason behind the whole Ukraine thing, too. Start off another round of taxpayer mony-funneling via no-questions-asked military contracts.
Aligo
Aug 31, 2014
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (7) Aug 31, 2014
Socialist central planning always has unintended negative consequences.
italba
4.8 / 5 (5) Aug 31, 2014
We must increase the number of electric cars, not reduce it.
But do the electric cars really decrease the carbon load of atmosphere?
In Norway absolutely YES. They get some 85% of their electric power from renewable sources, mostly hydroelectric.
italba
4.5 / 5 (4) Aug 31, 2014
Socialist central planning always has unintended negative consequences.

Sure! Who doesn't knows the infamous Norwegians soviets?
antialias_physorg
5 / 5 (7) Aug 31, 2014
Sure! Who doesn't knows the infamous Norwegians soviets?


C'mon. He's american. Anything that's roughly east (or south...or north...or west) of the united states is communist to him...or at the very least socialist. Can't expect him to know anything about the world aside from what he gets from cartoons. Not his fault.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (7) Aug 31, 2014
Socialist central planning always has unintended negative consequences.

Sure! Who doesn't knows the infamous Norwegians soviets?


Sure! Who doesn't knows the infamous Norwegians soviets?


C'mon. He's american. Anything that's roughly east (or south...or north...or west) of the united states is communist to him...or at the very least socialist. Can't expect him to know anything about the world aside from what he gets from cartoons. Not his fault.

Socialist central planning occurs all over the world.
Many US states granted privileges for electric/hybrid vehicles. HOV lanes were supposed to be used to reward car pooling, but single driver hybrids could use them too. Now HOV lanes are just as clogged.
US states and the US govt are seeing reductions in tax revenue from gasoline. So much so states want to charge all cars by distance driven.
The state of AZ lost a lot of money subsidizing CNG Suburbans.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (6) Aug 31, 2014
The popularity of electric cars in Norway suggests that the people of Norway value independence and the freedom to travel.
nilbud
5 / 5 (6) Aug 31, 2014
What does the popularity of peanuts in Norway suggest, that they are secretly elephants, or do they dream of being gerbils?
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Aug 31, 2014
If the govt imposed, higher costs of personal transportation are reduced, Norwegians take 'advantage'. Just as Arizona residents took advantage of a subsidy to convert their SUVs to CNG.
italba
5 / 5 (5) Aug 31, 2014
Socialist central planning occurs all over the world.
Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated.
HOV lanes were supposed to be used to reward car pooling, but single driver hybrids could use them too. Now HOV lanes are just as clogged.
And car pooling is not socialistic enough for you?
...states want to charge all cars by distance driven.
That will be absolutely fair and easily doable, with modern technology. Why don't you like it?
The state of AZ lost a lot of money subsidizing CNG Suburbans.
Do you like your country keep subsidizing sheiks by burning unnecessary oil? USA has a lot of natural gas, improving the use of it is the right thing to do!
antialias_physorg
5 / 5 (5) Sep 01, 2014
The popularity of electric cars in Norway suggests that the people of Norway value independence and the freedom to travel.

The popularity of EVs in Norway suggests that they make economic sense. People in Norway don't have any more money to splurge on idealistic pursuits than people in the United States.
If EVs give obvious advantages (in this case costing less and allowing you to shave off significant time from your commute) then they will be bought. Simple as that.

That will be absolutely fair and easily doable, with modern technology.

Need to be careful about that. Tracking people is a privacy issue that should not be underestimated.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (6) Sep 01, 2014
That will be absolutely fair and easily doable, with modern technology. Why don't you like it?

Never said I didn't like turning all roads into toll roads.
BUT, state and federal gas taxes need to be eliminated AND, the money collected needs to fund the roads that generated the revenue.
improving the use of it is the right thing to do!

Not when AZ taxpayers are subsidizing SUV and HumVee owners.
The popularity of EVs in Norway suggests that they make economic sense.

Eliminate ALL subsidies, including the high taxes on gas/diesel autos and fuel and see what happens.
Need to be careful about that. Tracking people is a privacy issue that should not be underestimated

Everyone with a cell phone can be tracked now.
antialias_physorg
5 / 5 (4) Sep 01, 2014
Need to be careful about that. Tracking people is a privacy issue that should not be underestimated

Everyone with a cell phone can be tracked now.

The issue is not 'can' but 'should they'.
Can people with cell phones be tracked? Yes.
Should they as a matter of course (e.g. for some payment scheme or just to have the data for some unspecified purpose in the future)? No.

Eliminate ALL subsidies, including the high taxes on gas/diesel autos and fuel and see what happens.

OK. Eliminate the negative taxes on oil companies and the like (and make them pay for the ecological damage. Because it isn't fair unless you include that. It's a hidden subsidy that they can pollute and the taxpayer has to pay for the clean-up, you know.

Now THAT will be an interesting day. And all the calcs I've read on that say: fossil (and nuclear) lose under those conditions. Badly.

ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (4) Sep 01, 2014
It's a hidden subsidy that they can pollute and the taxpayer has to pay for the clean-up, you know

Yes, let's end the socialization of risk.
All individuals, businesses and industries must be subject to the common law principles that allow property owners to sue anyone for violating their property rights, regardless of damages.
The Fascist state won't permit this because they need to allow industries to pollute for the benefit of the state.
Govts limit liability of favored industries with the excuse the industry is vital to the state, ( but not necessarily to the individuals in the state).
italba
5 / 5 (4) Sep 01, 2014
Never said I didn't like turning all roads into toll roads.
BUT, state and federal gas taxes need to be eliminated
That's ok. You must not pay taxes twice.
the money collected needs to fund the roads that generated the revenue.
That's NOT ok. The road must be built, maintained and keep safe BEFORE you drive into it!
Govts limit liability of favored industries with the excuse the industry is vital to the state, ( but not necessarily to the individuals in the state).
That can be right only if "individuals" want to live as cavemen or, at best, as American Indians
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Sep 01, 2014
That can be right only if "individuals" want to live as cavemen

Typical fear mongering to justify the socialist state.
italba
5 / 5 (4) Sep 01, 2014
Typical fear mongering to justify the socialist state.
Who, as an individual, needs a 500 billions per year army? Space exploration? Sub-nuclear research facilities? And, if I'm not sick today, why should I pay for hospitals? And those pesky farms of cars and trucks who need them if you can ride your horse with a winchester in your right hand and a Bible in your left one? Hippiyaye!
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Sep 01, 2014
Typical fear mongering to justify the socialist state.
Who, as an individual, needs a 500 billions per year army? Space exploration? Sub-nuclear research facilities? And, if I'm not sick today, why should I pay for hospitals? And those pesky farms of cars and trucks who need them if you can ride your horse with a winchester in your right hand and a Bible in your left one? Hippiyaye!

Why does this require a socialist state?
kochevnik
5 / 5 (2) Sep 01, 2014
Typical fear mongering to justify the socialist state.
Who, as an individual, needs a 500 billions per year army? Space exploration? Sub-nuclear research facilities? And, if I'm not sick today, why should I pay for hospitals? And those pesky farms of cars and trucks who need them if you can ride your horse with a winchester in your right hand and a Bible in your left one? Hippiyaye!
Why does this require a socialist state?
Because you will simply ignore problems or hope they disappear, ryggie. At some point the flies and the stink become too much for your neighbors and they will use force to shut down your meth lab. That's socialism

BTW Norway is socialist and they seem to be doing well, despite too much drinking as you mentioned earlier
italba
5 / 5 (4) Sep 01, 2014
Why does this require a socialist state?
Not socialist, but surely we all need a state.
BTW Norway is socialist and they seem to be doing well, despite too much drinking as you mentioned earlier
Norwegian government WAS social democratic until last year, now they have a two right-wing parties coalition government
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Sep 01, 2014
but surely we all need a state.

Then why all the BS earlier? When did I say there wasn't a legitimate purpose for a govt? That purpose is protecting private property rights.

At some point the flies and the stink become too much for your neighbors and they will use force to shut down your meth lab. That's socialism


No. It's the state doing its job of protecting private property. Govts around the country and the world are doing quite a poor job on the 'war on drugs'. Why?
BTW Norway is socialist

Not as socialist as you would expect.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Sep 02, 2014
"HONG KONG | How did this small city-state of 7.3 million people go from having a per-capita income of only a few hundred dollars per year to a per capita income that is equal to that of the United States in only 50 years? The simple answer is they had the British common law legal system, strong private property rights, competent, honest judges, a non-corrupt civil service, very low tax rates, free trade and a minimal amount of economic regulation. There was no big brother government looking after the people, so they had to work hard, but they could keep the fruits of their efforts.'
"There was no foreign aid and no welfare state — but there was a competent government that kept the peace, ran an honest court system with the rule of law, provided some basic infrastructure, and little more."
http://www.washin...rogress/
italba
5 / 5 (2) Sep 02, 2014
That purpose is protecting private property rights.
For that all you need is a sheriff. A state should think about something else, for instance welfare, education, scientific research, global economic development, strategic decisions about economy...
"HONG KONG | How did this small city-state of 7.3 million people go from having a per-capita income of only a few hundred dollars per year to a per capita income that is equal to that of the United States in only 50 years?
Hong Kong was the only "door" towards China, and one of the biggest port in that area. It is small enough to not need to care about army or foreign politics. They only had to care about (legal or illegal) trade, the same for Montecarlo, Luxembourg or Switzerland. Those small country can only prosper when other big countries pay for them what they can't afford.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Sep 02, 2014
A state should think about something else, for instance welfare, education, scientific research, global economic development, strategic decisions about economy...


Why?
A state should secure the borders and protect private property.

antialias_physorg
5 / 5 (3) Sep 02, 2014
A state should secure the borders and protect private property.

A state is there to keep a society together. This worked without a state in small groups because everyone knew everyone and helped everyone. In large groups (especially nation-size) that doesn't work - so there is an institutionalized way of helping each other (laws, civil services, police, education, ... )
A society only stays together if the individuals want to stay together.

Securing private property laws and borders is exactly the opposite of that.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Sep 02, 2014
A state is there to keep a society together.

How?
Society existed long before states.
A society only stays together if the individuals want to stay together.

So the state is needed to FORCE people to stay in the society?

Securing private property laws and borders is exactly the opposite of that.


You have it backwards. When the state refuses to protect the private property of each individual and instead plunders property from some to give to others, socialism, society breaks down.

Norway and other small nation-states can tolerate their welfare state because, for the most part, they have a homogenous society and a culture of gratitude. Their unwise importation of Muslims is destabilizing their society as more foreigners and some locals claim an entitlement to the plundered wealth of others.

italba
5 / 5 (4) Sep 02, 2014
A state should secure the borders and protect private property.
Plain wrong. To protect private property you don't need a state and a state could also exists if there are no borders, would it be the only one on earth.
So the state is needed to FORCE people to stay in the society?
If you are not part of the society you can only be a hermit or a caveman
When the state refuses to protect the private property of each individual and instead plunders property from some to give to others, socialism, society breaks down.
Purpose of every society, not only states, is to protect the poor and to help each other in case of accidents.
Norway...can tolerate their welfare state...Their unwise importation of Muslims is destabilizing their society.
Muslims have as a main precept of their religion to pay part of their earnings for the poor. So they're much better than some selfish, self-defined good Christian.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Sep 02, 2014
Purpose of every society, not only states, is to protect the poor and to help each other in case of accidents.


Protect only the poor? Why not protect all?

Don't disagree with the purpose of society, but how does a society protect all if it can plunder the wealth of anyone?
Before the 'Progressive' Welfare State in the US, there used to be mutual aid societies. They were 100% voluntary and functioned to protect the poor and help those who were ill.
self-defined good Christian.

Christians are supposed to tithe. Mormons are especially vigilant.
Islam is not a religion, it is a coercive govt.
italba
5 / 5 (3) Sep 03, 2014
Protect only the poor? Why not protect all?
Because wealthy can easily protect themselves.
...there used to be mutual aid societies. They were 100% voluntary...
Anybody who wants to live in a society must pay for what he will get. If you want to be helped when in troubles you must pay the right price, scroungers should not be allowed. Otherwise you should sign a formal act of withdrawal from public help. And about voluntary: A mutual aid voluntary organization is not required to help everybody in the same way, this again would not be fair.
Islam is not a religion, it is a coercive govt.
This is really humorous. Islam is split in many different "churches", the majority of which don't even have any formal hierarchy.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Sep 03, 2014
Because wealthy can easily protect themselves.

Not very egalitarian.
So you want the wealthy to have a different system of justice than the rest?

. Islam is split in many different "churches"

The Koran, which binds them all, is essentially a constitution, the law.
italba
5 / 5 (3) Sep 03, 2014
So you want the wealthy to have a different system of justice than the rest?
No, I want that everybody could have the same justice. This is not true now, the justice you'll have depends on the lawyers you can afford to pay.
The Koran, which binds them all, is essentially a constitution, the law.
Why "constitution"? Koran it's the law, so is the Bible for Christians and Torah for Jews. So what?
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Sep 03, 2014
No, I want that everybody could have the same justice.

And you think the wealthy should have their wealth plundered to pay for the poor?
italba
3.7 / 5 (3) Sep 03, 2014
And you think the wealthy should have their wealth plundered to pay for the poor?
They have to pay a right percentage of their earnings for their less wealthy neighbors, like every society (think about a family) should do between its associated, in their own interest. The wealthy of today could be the poor of tomorrow, and less wealth differences or, at least, less miserable poor, will decrease crimes.
Vietvet
5 / 5 (2) Sep 03, 2014
No, I want that everybody could have the same justice.

And you think the wealthy should have their wealth plundered to pay for the poor?


Your use of "plundered" is getting old. It's called paying taxes and tax rates are determined by elected representatives.

The wealthier an individual is the more opportunities there are to shield their wealth from taxes, they are hardly being plundered.

Vietvet
5 / 5 (2) Sep 03, 2014
@italba

Sorry for the accidental down vote.
italba
3.7 / 5 (3) Sep 04, 2014
@Vietvet: No problem, I just don't care about votes.
antialias_physorg
5 / 5 (2) Sep 04, 2014

And you think the wealthy should have their wealth plundered to pay for the poor?

I guess it's more the other way raound: Let's not have the wealthy plunder the poor to get wealthy (because, in effect, all profit is just that: selling something above the price of what it is actually worth.)
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Sep 04, 2014
It's called paying taxes and tax rates are determined by elected representatives.

51% can plunder the 49% or the 1%. It's called 'progressive' taxation.

Let's not have the wealthy plunder the poor to get wealthy

How can 'the wealthy' plunder the poor without the aid and support of the state?
selling something above the price of what it is actually worth.

Why would anyone pay more than what its worth?
Norway subsidizes the billionaire Musk so people can afford his cars. What is the value here for those being plundered to subsidize a billionaire?
antialias_physorg
5 / 5 (3) Sep 04, 2014
Why would anyone pay more than what its worth?

Because someone (or a group of people) demand a price that is above what it's worth while having exclusive access to product?

What is the value here for those being plundered to subsidize a billionaire?

Public health (i.e. saved taxes on providing medical aid for people who suffer due to poisoned atmosphere) . If a subsidy saves more money than it costs then it's worth it.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Sep 04, 2014
demand a price that is above what it's worth while having exclusive access to product?

Give an example and one that is not protected from competition by some state govt.

If a subsidy saves more money than it costs then it's worth it.

How do you determine the value?
Why should a billionaire be subsidized?
antialias_physorg
5 / 5 (4) Sep 04, 2014
Give an example and one that is not protected from competition by some state govt.

Any resource (ore, oil, coal, whatever).
Any product where there are few players that don't actually compete but just agree to keep prices way above costs (electronics sector).

When you look at the holdings structure you will realize how few actual players there are.
http://ygraph.com/chart/2109
...and that most 'competition' is actually from brands within the same mother company (i.e. only competition in name)
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Sep 04, 2014
Any resource (ore, oil, coal, whatever).

All involve some level of state protection.

agree to keep prices way above costs (electronics sector).

What companies?
Data has shown such collusion never succeeds.
that most 'competition' is actually from brands within the same mother company

So?
They are called 'holding' companies for a reason.
antialias_physorg
4.2 / 5 (5) Sep 04, 2014
All involve some level of state protection.

BP is state protected? Exxon? Billington? ...
These are transmationals. They are not beholden to any nation (effectively being laws unto themselves). Even companies like Apple ship their profits off shore instead of letting the government 'protect them'.

What companies?

Apple. Look for their teardowns. You think a company that has 60% net profit(!) sells at cost? Or even close to that? They're ripping people off - plain and simple.

They are called 'holding' companies for a reason.

So the 'competition' model doesn't exist anymore. Hasn't existed for quite some time.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Sep 04, 2014
Maybe some German cartels with state protection, can practice predatory pricing, but not for long.
"One of the sacred cows of statism is the idea that government needs to protect us from predatory price-cutting. Large corporations, according to this argument, have big advantages in the marketplace. They can cut prices, drive out their competitors, then raise prices later and gouge consumers. Antitrust laws are needed, so the argument continues, to protect small businesses and consumers from those corporations with large market shares in their industries."
"30 German firms had combined to form a cartel, Die Deutsche Bromkonvention, which fixed the world price for bromine at a lucrative 49 cents a pound. Customers either paid the 49 cents or they went without. Dow and other American companies sold bromine in the United States for 36 cents. "
http://www.fee.or...-pricing
The cartel eventually failed.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (4) Sep 04, 2014
BP is state protected? Exxon? Billington? ...
These are transmationals. They are not beholden to any nation


What energy company in the world owns the oil or coal? Most all pay royalties to the state and bid for govt permissions to explore for oil.

Don't like Apple? Buy Samsung or Dell or ....

ship their profits off shore instead of letting the government 'protect them'.

You men 'plunder them'.

There was time when one could pay a flat tax, maybe $50-$100k to Switzerland for a Swiss passport. For some, that would be a good deal.
Even Sweden repealed its wealth tax hoping wealthy Swedes would return.

So the 'competition' model doesn't exist anymore.

Maybe not in fascist Europe.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (4) Sep 04, 2014
Speaking of Apple:
"Following report of the latest security attack of Apple's iCloud service over the weekend and news of a smartphone partnership between Samsung and Facebook (FB), Apple's shares are under major pressure."
"Investors are worried about Apple's continued slide behind rivals pushing in new technology."
http://americasma...a-share/
TheGhostofOtto1923
3 / 5 (2) Sep 04, 2014
The popularity of EVs in Norway suggests that they make economic sense
They make economic sense for consumers because of the massive subsidies. Read the article.

"... also exempt from urban toll payments or fees at public parking spaces, where they can recharge batteries without cost... sky high sales taxes and VAT."
If a subsidy saves more money than it costs then it's worth it.
Thats only if actual costs are accurately reported. Heres a curious report;
http://www.nve.no...re-2011/

-If you scroll down to the pie chart 'Production in Norway 2011 - by source of energy' youll see that hydropower provides 95.3% of their electricity. Wind is 1%. Why the massive subsidies for a sector which has no real effect on power supply? Much of this electricity is free regardless of source.

"the volume of electricity for customers who do not purchase electricity for which guarantees of origin are redeemed totals 109.2 TWh."
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.7 / 5 (3) Sep 04, 2014
BP is state protected? Exxon? Billington? ...
These are transmationals. They are not beholden to any nation (effectively being laws unto themselves)
More mythologizing.

"Oil production is one of the most heavily subsidized businesses in America, with tax breaks available at almost every stage of the exploration and extraction process, according to an analysis by The New York Times."

"Oil industry officials say that the tax breaks, which average about $4 billion a year according to various government reports, are a bargain for taxpayers. By helping producers weather market fluctuations and invest in technology, tax incentives are supporting an industry that the officials say provides 9.2 million jobs."

-BP is obviously state-protected.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Sep 04, 2014
BP, et alreceive the same tax breaks as any other industry.
In addition, they must pay govts for exploration 'rights' and pay royalties to govts for the oil they extract.
This is why Alaska residents receive hundreds of dollars every year and Norwegians have thousands from oil revenue.
" Everyone in Norway became a theoretical krone millionaire on Wednesday in a milestone for the world's biggest sovereign wealth fund that has ballooned thanks to high oil and gas prices.

Set up in 1990, the fund owns around 1 percent of the world's stocks, as well as bonds and real estate from London to Boston, making the Nordic nation an exception when others are struggling under a mountain of debts"
"Farm subsidies allow farmers, for instance, to keep dairy cows in heated barns in the Arctic.

It may also have made some Norwegians reluctant to work. "One in five people of working age receives some kind of social insurance instead of working," Doerum said, despite an official unemployment rate of 3.3 percent.
http://www.cnbc.c...01321953
italba
5 / 5 (1) Sep 04, 2014
How do you determine the value?
Why should a billionaire be subsidized?
Do you would like to subsidize sheiks? Be careful, they are Muslims!
It may also have made some Norwegians reluctant to work. "One in five people of working age receives some kind of social insurance instead of working," Doerum said, despite an official unemployment rate of 3.3 percent.
And why should they work if they can live well by selling THEIR oil (it's THEIR OIL, not Shell's, not Texaco's, not BP's...) to a bunch of idiots unable to even understand that it's time to develop and use some more efficient technology than the plain old gas engine?
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Sep 04, 2014
would like to subsidize sheiks?

No, but the US govt does by refusing to drill for oil in the US.
why should they work

It's good for them.
Read Aesop's Ant and Grasshopper.

ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Sep 04, 2014
""In Norway, job security seems to be taken for granted, almost like it's a human right to have a job," says Hans Petter Havdal, CEO of car-parts maker Kongsberg Automotive.

Kongsberg Automotive has only 5 percent of its workers left in Norway, having moved jobs to places like Mexico, China and the United States, and keeping only high-tech, automated functions at home. It says it is struggling with high labor costs and even problems such as excessive sick leave."
"Neighbor Sweden, meanwhile, cut sickness and unemployment benefits and lowered income, wealth and corporate taxes. Its tax burden has fallen by four percentage points of gross domestic product, now making it lower than France.

But such wage adjustment in Norway is unlikely in the near term, and unions dispute that the country has a competitiveness problem. Industrial workers nearly went on strike in April until last-minute concessions."
http://www.reuter...3Z201405
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (3) Sep 04, 2014
Why work?
"The Gulf countries are rich but fragile. Youth unemployment in Saudi Arabia is between 30 and 40 percent, and half the country's 28 million people are under 25 years of age. In other Gulf nations a tiny strata of superrich rule over a huge and exploited foreign workforce. When the monarchies begin to unravel, the current chaos will look like the Pax Romana."
http://fpif.org/i...le-east/

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.