Tesla Model S

[Carbon82]

While I agreed that the data might have been obtained through different test method and/or standard, but how far can it go?

 

I have a rude shock when I start searching on onemoting website for the official data in Singapore. Have a good look at the figures of BMW i3 & i8 (Page 20 of the list), and compare it with figures published on BMW website... ... Such a huge variations in data??

 

LTA Info: https://vrl.lta.gov.sg/rpt/vrl/data_arch/VT035W201602272001185241.zip

BMW i3: http://www.bmw.com/com/en/newvehicles/i/i3/2015/showroom/technical_data.html#m=i3_range_extender

BMW i8: http://www.bmw.com/com/en/newvehicles/i/i8/2014/showroom/technical_data.html

 

In case you cannot open the file in the LTA link, go to https://vrl.lta.gov.sg/lta/vrl/action/loadFuelCostCalAction?FUNCTION_ID=F2305001ET, and click on "Download All Vehicle Fuel Economy Data" tab. It should work.

Edited March 3, 2016 by Carbon82

[Runforyourlife]

Majority voted Liao lei, why complain now lol

[Vratenza]

As someone who isn't technically trained, what they did seems logical to me.

 

How should they have done it?

i am not technically trained as well.

 

the point of contention will be power output = emission.

 

different engine technology has different efficiency which will result in different emission level for the same power output.

 

So in order to tax the Tesla forcibly using the outdated COE/CEVS system, they did the back calculation as a stop-gap measure.

 

So end of the day, what is CEVS for? protect the environment? to gently nudge consumers to wards greener choice?

 

What are petrol duties for? To implement usage charges ontop of ERP? congestion control or environmental concerns?

 

Now comes a full electric sports sedan that has zero emissions, do not use up any fossil fuels directly, best option for mother earth and the best you can do is to back calculate the emission based on power output?. That is slipshod work.

 

Give you an example using the Lexus GS450h. It has a 3.5 v6 engine mated to a high torque motor/battery system. Power from the petrol engine itself is about 290hp but combined with the electric motor, it is rated at 340hp and a torque that is not measurable by the traditional dyno settings. So officially even the manufacturer do not have a power/torque graph for the car. According to the manufacturer, the reason why it named it GS450h is because it is almost equivalent in power output to that of a 4.5L V8 engine. But I can tell you, even that will be understatement with the instantaneous torque this car can release from the word go.

So based on LTA's logic, this car should have been slapped with a 4.5L V8 engine emission CEVS penalty instead of the rebate it enjoys.

[Jman888]

if want to cut down noise and fuel pollution, the more they should allow E-bike on the road to replace motorbike 

[Runforyourlife]

All e implementation is with a view towards govt income and then come out with a plausible explanation to citizens. Cevs is e most obvious example. You lose out on parf if you choose for a more environmentally friendly car, which is quite a joke.

[1fast1]

Majority voted Liao lei, why complain now lol

 

More goofy years ahead.

[Car_byte]

Wonder if Nyugen consider maintenance and up keeping as car is unique and only unit. E.g simple blown bulb replacement and worst case body parts.

Edited March 3, 2016 by Car_byte

[NightWind]

They simply delete the original tread and burry it here.

 

 

 

I do agree LTA is slow-moving compared to the technological advancements in even simple machines like cars.

 

However, I'm not so sure they could have calculated wrongly the fossil fuel usage vs CO2 emissions. Its just 'O' level maths.

 

They just have to run the standard economy tests till the car is empty and measure how much electrical energy is used to recharge it, then convert it to coal, oil, natural gas or nuclear, plus some transmission losses.

 

To be a CO2 powerhouse, you can peg it to coal or even wood-fired powerplants. To be a Prius, just peg it to nuclear reactors.

 

Depends on how much they like to load you, they just apply the table accordingly

 

[Jtis]

Pegging to carbon emissions of per unit electricity generated by gencos and supplied by grid operator Singapore Power sounds reasonable to me. Electricity has to come from somewhere, doesnt mean it is zero emission because it is not a fossil fuel powered engine.

 

But i think the more pertinent issue is accuracy of measurement, either of how much charge is consumed to move a certain distance or how far the car travels on a unit measure of battery charge. To measure that accurately, how much electricity is consumed to charge the vehicle fully, and how far it can travel on a full charge is key. If the equipment to measure that is not set up properly, there are potential opportunities for inaccurate readings, which will affect the subsequent pegging to grid electricty emissions.

[Jman888]

They simply delete the original tread and burry it here.

 

 

seriously you want to go into this?

[inlinesix]

All e implementation is with a view towards govt income and then come out with a plausible explanation to citizens. Cevs is e most obvious example. You lose out on parf if you choose for a more environmentally friendly car, which is quite a joke.

 

Are you sure?

 

Let's says BMW 116d with OMV of $23,629.  ARF is $25,081.  PARF on 9th year is $12,540.50

 

This car has CEV of $15k.  ARF after CEV is 10,081.  PARF on 9th year is $5k.

[Kusje]

i am not technically trained as well.

 

the point of contention will be power output = emission.

 

different engine technology has different efficiency which will result in different emission level for the same power output.

 

So in order to tax the Tesla forcibly using the outdated COE/CEVS system, they did the back calculation as a stop-gap measure.

 

So end of the day, what is CEVS for? protect the environment? to gently nudge consumers to wards greener choice?

 

What are petrol duties for? To implement usage charges ontop of ERP? congestion control or environmental concerns?

 

Now comes a full electric sports sedan that has zero emissions, do not use up any fossil fuels directly, best option for mother earth and the best you can do is to back calculate the emission based on power output?. That is slipshod work.

 

Give you an example using the Lexus GS450h. It has a 3.5 v6 engine mated to a high torque motor/battery system. Power from the petrol engine itself is about 290hp but combined with the electric motor, it is rated at 340hp and a torque that is not measurable by the traditional dyno settings. So officially even the manufacturer do not have a power/torque graph for the car. According to the manufacturer, the reason why it named it GS450h is because it is almost equivalent in power output to that of a 4.5L V8 engine. But I can tell you, even that will be understatement with the instantaneous torque this car can release from the word go.

So based on LTA's logic, this car should have been slapped with a 4.5L V8 engine emission CEVS penalty instead of the rebate it enjoys.

 

I think you are mistaken as LTA is measuring power INPUT and not output. If the car really consumes 444 watt hr to move 1 km and the powerstation emits 444x amount of emissions to generate that amount of power, then what's wrong with using that for the calculations?

 

Unless you tell me that this guy has a solar power setup (specially for his car) and is charging his Tesla from solar power? Mind you, the solar power system should also be a new set up and not an existing one otherwise it is just like transferring your money from left pocket to right.

Pegging to carbon emissions of per unit electricity generated by gencos and supplied by grid operator Singapore Power sounds reasonable to me. Electricity has to come from somewhere, doesnt mean it is zero emission because it is not a fossil fuel powered engine.

 

But i think the more pertinent issue is accuracy of measurement, either of how much charge is consumed to move a certain distance or how far the car travels on a unit measure of battery charge. To measure that accurately, how much electricity is consumed to charge the vehicle fully, and how far it can travel on a full charge is key. If the equipment to measure that is not set up properly, there are potential opportunities for inaccurate readings, which will affect the subsequent pegging to grid electricty emissions.

 

Exactly my point. If the owner wants to dispute the emissions findings by Vicom then he needs to get a 2nd lab to do the test. To claim his car is "emissions free" is dishonest.

[Runforyourlife]

Are you sure?

 

Let's says BMW 116d with OMV of $23,629. ARF is $25,081. PARF on 9th year is $12,540.50

 

This car has CEV of $15k. ARF after CEV is 10,081. PARF on 9th year is $5k.

For another car with the same cost without cevs, what will the arf be?

[Watwheels]

I think the Tesla Model S has a couple of options in terms of performance, namely P90D  90D  & 70D.  I think it also has an option of front and rear motors or just the rear motor. All these would explain the requirement of the paperworks for the car. LTA needs to know kW or hp it produces to categorise it under Cat A or B and how much to tax it. They also need to dyno test the car to verify whether the paperwork the  car owner has submitted is correct or not.

 

For the P90D model it has a "Ludicrous mode" that produces 532hp. That may explain why he had to pay extra 15K if LTA go by how much power produced per hour converting it to carbon emissions.

 

I also think LTA has problem trying to test the front and rear motors individually for how much power each produces. The news article say the car is sitting there collecting dust. More like engineers at LTA are trying to figure out how to go about testing it when the machine they have is only good for petrol & diesel cars.

 

https://www.teslamotors.com/models

Edited March 3, 2016 by Watwheels

[BenTong]

This Nguyen in hot soup. There goes his PR or EP or whatever. He just want to claim the $15k discount la. Now he kena slap tax why not? Good for our national revenue

[BenTong]

Majority voted Liao lei, why complain now lol

70% voted for this Nguyen to pay $15k tax while 30% wants to gov to give him $15k to spend huh?

[Zxcvb]

Actually the main crunch of it all is not about the car, but the bureaucracy associated with relevant government agencies. It exposed the inadequancies of LTA in handling this issue. Sama sama in other government agencies or stat boards. It seems like LTA is not doing it's job or not preaching what it should be doing - what green car, rebate, blah blah. Might as well state that as long as the vehicle takes up road space, you will pay extra, regardless green or not.

 

Tell you GST is to help the poor, but the poor also have to pay GST. 

[Vratenza]

I think you are mistaken as LTA is measuring power INPUT and not output. If the car really consumes 444 watt hr to move 1 km and the powerstation emits 444x amount of emissions to generate that amount of power, then what's wrong with using that for the calculations?

 

Unless you tell me that this guy has a solar power setup (specially for his car) and is charging his Tesla from solar power? Mind you, the solar power system should also be a new set up and not an existing one otherwise it is just like transferring your money from left pocket to right.

 

 

Exactly my point. If the owner wants to dispute the emissions findings by Vicom then he needs to get a 2nd lab to do the test. To claim his car is "emissions free" is dishonest.

If your point is that the guy is using electricity that produces emissions while driving, then consider these points:

 

1. This guy plugs it into his own house power outlet to charge.

2. The electricity used being paid by him.

3. S Power already have electricity tariffs to partially reflect the environmental concerns (emissions produced during electricity generation) and encourage energy savings.

4. Electricty here in Singapore is never cheap. Say his household electrical bill may be $500 a month (private landed), once he start charging the car on a daily basis, it can easily go up to $1.2-1.5k? Thats is a usage cost of easily $700 to 1k. Even my monthly petrol cost from east to west and back to east travel on average only $500. So, do not worry that someone is having a free energy ride here.

5. He is not being dishonest here. He is just playing by the rules set by LTA. From dinosaur period, LTA has set emission to mean co2 produced directly by the car exhaust. They did not factor in the emission produced to smelt the steel, refine the plastics component from crude oil, cast form the tyres, form the windows and windscreen, weld the joints during the production of each car. So to be fair to all drivers and non driver, should we start calculating how much emission is produced to make each car model? I assume that a rolls royce phantom will easily double the manufacturing emission of a picanto?