Two Editorials Concerning the U.S. Subsidy on Electric Cars

A Response to Two Editorials Concerning the U.S. Subsidy on Electric Cars Name Institution Affiliation A Response to Two Editorials Concerning the U.S. Subsidy on Electric Cars In the United States, greenhouse gas emission is on the rise. The gas is emitted from manufacturing and transportation industries which majorly depend on gasoline as the primary source of energy. In America, there are so many cars and, therefore, to reduce greenhouse gas emission, the models of the vehicles should be changed. Car industries have realized the importance of reducing the use of gasoline; this has made some companies start manufacturing electric cars. The first gasoline-electric Prius hybrid was invented in Japan in 1997, since then the General Motors and Nissan have also introduced electric vehicles. These cars are expensive and to make a large number of people import the United States’ government has introduced subsidies on the cars. Support and opposition in equal measure have met the subsidy. The article ‘Our view of energy: Electric car market gets useful jump-start’, published in The USA Today on December 20, 2010, supports that use of electric or semi-electric cars will reduce the use of gasoline. The reduced use of gasoline will imply that less greenhouse effect gasses will be emitted from the transport industry. The article supports the reduction of the use of gasoline by giving examples of cars such as the Chevy Volt, which can go a distance of between 25 to 50 miles before its battery can be discharged, after the discharge, the battery is then recharged by gasoline. Another example is the Nissan Leaf that primarily depends on its battery charge; the car can travel a distance of between 62 to 138 miles before the battery can be recharged. These two examples indicate that electric cars will reduce the use of greenhouse gas emission, and the harmful effect of the gas will be mitigated, and therefore subsidy for electric cars is necessary. The article by Green, (December 20, 2010), ‘Opposing view of energy: Subsidies? Just say no’ published in the USA Today opposes the idea of reduction of gasoline use and the need of subsidy. In the article, Green argues that the use of gasoline will remain as before or even increase. Green is supporting his argument by pointing out that to generate electricity one has to use gasoline. In the article, the author notes that unless the electricity used in the cars is from clean sources like wind, nuclear, hydro and solar power, there will be no environmental benefits in using electric cars. The author of the article argues that only 30% of the energy used in the United States is from clean sources; and since the number of cars is on the rise, emission of greenhouse gases will increase drastically and therefore there is no need of the subsidy. Electric car technology is expensive. Manufacturing expenses are always transferred to the consumers. For example, the volt lists for $41,000 while the Nissan leaf list for $33,000, these prices are outrageous for most people and therefore the government subsidy will help jump-start the market. In the United States, according to the article ‘Our View of energy: Electric car market gets jump-start’, the United States government is suggesting a tax subsid...