Effectiveness of China's plug-in electric vehicle subsidy

Subsidies for promoting plug-in electric vehicle (PEV) adoption are a key component of China's overall plan for reducing local air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from the light-duty vehicle sector. In this paper, we explore the impact and cost-effectiveness of the Chinese PEV subsidy pr...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Energy economics 2020-05, Vol.88, p.104773, Article 104773
Hauptverfasser: Sheldon, Tamara L., Dua, Rubal
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue
container_start_page 104773
container_title Energy economics
container_volume 88
creator Sheldon, Tamara L.
Dua, Rubal
description Subsidies for promoting plug-in electric vehicle (PEV) adoption are a key component of China's overall plan for reducing local air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from the light-duty vehicle sector. In this paper, we explore the impact and cost-effectiveness of the Chinese PEV subsidy program. In particular, a vehicle choice model is estimated using a large random sample of individual level, model year 2017 Chinese new vehicle purchases. The choice model is then used to predict PEV market share under alternative policies. Simulation results suggest that the 2.5% PEV market share of Chinese new vehicle sales in 2017 resulted in China's new vehicle fleet fuel economy improving by roughly 2%, reducing total gasoline consumption by 6.66 billion liters. However, the current PEV subsidy in China is expensive, costing $1.90 per additional liter of gasoline saved. This is due to a large number of non-additional PEV buyers, particularly high income consumers, who would have purchased the PEV regardless of the subsidy. Eliminating the subsidy for high income consumers and increasing it for low income consumers could result in a substantially lower cost per additional PEV ($13,758 versus $24,506). This would allow for greater PEV adoption (3.11% versus 2.47% market share) for the same budget. In terms of the impact of the recently announced subsidy reduction, results suggest that the PEV market share in China would have declined by 21% had the subsidy been halved without any countervailing measures. Using the same reduced budget, had zero PEV subsidies been given to high-income consumers and higher subsidies been given to low-income consumers, the PEV market share would have declined by only 8%. •We explore the impact and cost-effectiveness of the Chinese PEV subsidy program.•A vehicle choice model is used to predict PEV market share under various policies.•The 2.5% PEV market share in 2017 resulted in new vehicle fleet fuel economy improving by ~2%.•The current PEV subsidy costs $1.90 per additional liter of gasoline saved.•Eliminating/increasing subsidies for high/low income buyers could lower cost per additional PEV.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.eneco.2020.104773
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2443645128</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0140988320301134</els_id><sourcerecordid>2443645128</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c441t-efa7f9ff0643eb0d22f2dc5da3afa226798d5dd20e1f84c2872588254a25aeca3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kD9PwzAQxS0EEqXwCVgiMTCl2Gc7cQYGVPFPqsQCs-XaZ-ooJMVuKvXb4xJmppPu3nun9yPkmtEFo6y6axfYox0WQOG4EXXNT8iMqZqXFVPslMwoE7RslOLn5CKlllIqK6lmpHn0Hu0u7HNASsXgi-Um9OY2Fdtu_CxDX2CX7zHYYo-bYDss0rhOwR0uyZk3XcKrvzknH0-P78uXcvX2_Lp8WJVWCLYr0ZvaN97TSnBcUwfgwVnpDDfeAFR1o5x0Digyr4QFVYNUCqQwIA1aw-fkZsrdxuF7xLTT7TDGPr_UIASvhGSgsopPKhuHlCJ6vY3hy8SDZlQfGelW_zLSR0Z6YpRd95MLc4F9wKiTDdhbdCHm1toN4V__D34Db-8</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2443645128</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Effectiveness of China's plug-in electric vehicle subsidy</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><source>PAIS Index</source><creator>Sheldon, Tamara L. ; Dua, Rubal</creator><creatorcontrib>Sheldon, Tamara L. ; Dua, Rubal</creatorcontrib><description>Subsidies for promoting plug-in electric vehicle (PEV) adoption are a key component of China's overall plan for reducing local air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from the light-duty vehicle sector. In this paper, we explore the impact and cost-effectiveness of the Chinese PEV subsidy program. In particular, a vehicle choice model is estimated using a large random sample of individual level, model year 2017 Chinese new vehicle purchases. The choice model is then used to predict PEV market share under alternative policies. Simulation results suggest that the 2.5% PEV market share of Chinese new vehicle sales in 2017 resulted in China's new vehicle fleet fuel economy improving by roughly 2%, reducing total gasoline consumption by 6.66 billion liters. However, the current PEV subsidy in China is expensive, costing $1.90 per additional liter of gasoline saved. This is due to a large number of non-additional PEV buyers, particularly high income consumers, who would have purchased the PEV regardless of the subsidy. Eliminating the subsidy for high income consumers and increasing it for low income consumers could result in a substantially lower cost per additional PEV ($13,758 versus $24,506). This would allow for greater PEV adoption (3.11% versus 2.47% market share) for the same budget. In terms of the impact of the recently announced subsidy reduction, results suggest that the PEV market share in China would have declined by 21% had the subsidy been halved without any countervailing measures. Using the same reduced budget, had zero PEV subsidies been given to high-income consumers and higher subsidies been given to low-income consumers, the PEV market share would have declined by only 8%. •We explore the impact and cost-effectiveness of the Chinese PEV subsidy program.•A vehicle choice model is used to predict PEV market share under various policies.•The 2.5% PEV market share in 2017 resulted in new vehicle fleet fuel economy improving by ~2%.•The current PEV subsidy costs $1.90 per additional liter of gasoline saved.•Eliminating/increasing subsidies for high/low income buyers could lower cost per additional PEV.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0140-9883</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-6181</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.eneco.2020.104773</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Kidlington: Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Air pollution ; Air pollution measurements ; Budgets ; Computer simulation ; Consumers ; Cost analysis ; Costing ; Decision making models ; Electric vehicles ; Energy economics ; Fleet fuel economy ; Fuel economy ; Gasoline ; Greenhouse effect ; Greenhouse gases ; Impact strength ; Income ; Low income groups ; Market shares ; Plug-in electric vehicle ; Sales ; Simulation ; Subsidies ; Subsidy</subject><ispartof>Energy economics, 2020-05, Vol.88, p.104773, Article 104773</ispartof><rights>2020 The Author(s)</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier Science Ltd. May 2020</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c441t-efa7f9ff0643eb0d22f2dc5da3afa226798d5dd20e1f84c2872588254a25aeca3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c441t-efa7f9ff0643eb0d22f2dc5da3afa226798d5dd20e1f84c2872588254a25aeca3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2020.104773$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27866,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Sheldon, Tamara L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dua, Rubal</creatorcontrib><title>Effectiveness of China's plug-in electric vehicle subsidy</title><title>Energy economics</title><description>Subsidies for promoting plug-in electric vehicle (PEV) adoption are a key component of China's overall plan for reducing local air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from the light-duty vehicle sector. In this paper, we explore the impact and cost-effectiveness of the Chinese PEV subsidy program. In particular, a vehicle choice model is estimated using a large random sample of individual level, model year 2017 Chinese new vehicle purchases. The choice model is then used to predict PEV market share under alternative policies. Simulation results suggest that the 2.5% PEV market share of Chinese new vehicle sales in 2017 resulted in China's new vehicle fleet fuel economy improving by roughly 2%, reducing total gasoline consumption by 6.66 billion liters. However, the current PEV subsidy in China is expensive, costing $1.90 per additional liter of gasoline saved. This is due to a large number of non-additional PEV buyers, particularly high income consumers, who would have purchased the PEV regardless of the subsidy. Eliminating the subsidy for high income consumers and increasing it for low income consumers could result in a substantially lower cost per additional PEV ($13,758 versus $24,506). This would allow for greater PEV adoption (3.11% versus 2.47% market share) for the same budget. In terms of the impact of the recently announced subsidy reduction, results suggest that the PEV market share in China would have declined by 21% had the subsidy been halved without any countervailing measures. Using the same reduced budget, had zero PEV subsidies been given to high-income consumers and higher subsidies been given to low-income consumers, the PEV market share would have declined by only 8%. •We explore the impact and cost-effectiveness of the Chinese PEV subsidy program.•A vehicle choice model is used to predict PEV market share under various policies.•The 2.5% PEV market share in 2017 resulted in new vehicle fleet fuel economy improving by ~2%.•The current PEV subsidy costs $1.90 per additional liter of gasoline saved.•Eliminating/increasing subsidies for high/low income buyers could lower cost per additional PEV.</description><subject>Air pollution</subject><subject>Air pollution measurements</subject><subject>Budgets</subject><subject>Computer simulation</subject><subject>Consumers</subject><subject>Cost analysis</subject><subject>Costing</subject><subject>Decision making models</subject><subject>Electric vehicles</subject><subject>Energy economics</subject><subject>Fleet fuel economy</subject><subject>Fuel economy</subject><subject>Gasoline</subject><subject>Greenhouse effect</subject><subject>Greenhouse gases</subject><subject>Impact strength</subject><subject>Income</subject><subject>Low income groups</subject><subject>Market shares</subject><subject>Plug-in electric vehicle</subject><subject>Sales</subject><subject>Simulation</subject><subject>Subsidies</subject><subject>Subsidy</subject><issn>0140-9883</issn><issn>1873-6181</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kD9PwzAQxS0EEqXwCVgiMTCl2Gc7cQYGVPFPqsQCs-XaZ-ooJMVuKvXb4xJmppPu3nun9yPkmtEFo6y6axfYox0WQOG4EXXNT8iMqZqXFVPslMwoE7RslOLn5CKlllIqK6lmpHn0Hu0u7HNASsXgi-Um9OY2Fdtu_CxDX2CX7zHYYo-bYDss0rhOwR0uyZk3XcKrvzknH0-P78uXcvX2_Lp8WJVWCLYr0ZvaN97TSnBcUwfgwVnpDDfeAFR1o5x0Digyr4QFVYNUCqQwIA1aw-fkZsrdxuF7xLTT7TDGPr_UIASvhGSgsopPKhuHlCJ6vY3hy8SDZlQfGelW_zLSR0Z6YpRd95MLc4F9wKiTDdhbdCHm1toN4V__D34Db-8</recordid><startdate>20200501</startdate><enddate>20200501</enddate><creator>Sheldon, Tamara L.</creator><creator>Dua, Rubal</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><general>Elsevier Science Ltd</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7TA</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>JG9</scope><scope>SOI</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20200501</creationdate><title>Effectiveness of China's plug-in electric vehicle subsidy</title><author>Sheldon, Tamara L. ; Dua, Rubal</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c441t-efa7f9ff0643eb0d22f2dc5da3afa226798d5dd20e1f84c2872588254a25aeca3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Air pollution</topic><topic>Air pollution measurements</topic><topic>Budgets</topic><topic>Computer simulation</topic><topic>Consumers</topic><topic>Cost analysis</topic><topic>Costing</topic><topic>Decision making models</topic><topic>Electric vehicles</topic><topic>Energy economics</topic><topic>Fleet fuel economy</topic><topic>Fuel economy</topic><topic>Gasoline</topic><topic>Greenhouse effect</topic><topic>Greenhouse gases</topic><topic>Impact strength</topic><topic>Income</topic><topic>Low income groups</topic><topic>Market shares</topic><topic>Plug-in electric vehicle</topic><topic>Sales</topic><topic>Simulation</topic><topic>Subsidies</topic><topic>Subsidy</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Sheldon, Tamara L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dua, Rubal</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Materials Business File</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Materials Research Database</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Energy economics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Sheldon, Tamara L.</au><au>Dua, Rubal</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Effectiveness of China's plug-in electric vehicle subsidy</atitle><jtitle>Energy economics</jtitle><date>2020-05-01</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>88</volume><spage>104773</spage><pages>104773-</pages><artnum>104773</artnum><issn>0140-9883</issn><eissn>1873-6181</eissn><abstract>Subsidies for promoting plug-in electric vehicle (PEV) adoption are a key component of China's overall plan for reducing local air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from the light-duty vehicle sector. In this paper, we explore the impact and cost-effectiveness of the Chinese PEV subsidy program. In particular, a vehicle choice model is estimated using a large random sample of individual level, model year 2017 Chinese new vehicle purchases. The choice model is then used to predict PEV market share under alternative policies. Simulation results suggest that the 2.5% PEV market share of Chinese new vehicle sales in 2017 resulted in China's new vehicle fleet fuel economy improving by roughly 2%, reducing total gasoline consumption by 6.66 billion liters. However, the current PEV subsidy in China is expensive, costing $1.90 per additional liter of gasoline saved. This is due to a large number of non-additional PEV buyers, particularly high income consumers, who would have purchased the PEV regardless of the subsidy. Eliminating the subsidy for high income consumers and increasing it for low income consumers could result in a substantially lower cost per additional PEV ($13,758 versus $24,506). This would allow for greater PEV adoption (3.11% versus 2.47% market share) for the same budget. In terms of the impact of the recently announced subsidy reduction, results suggest that the PEV market share in China would have declined by 21% had the subsidy been halved without any countervailing measures. Using the same reduced budget, had zero PEV subsidies been given to high-income consumers and higher subsidies been given to low-income consumers, the PEV market share would have declined by only 8%. •We explore the impact and cost-effectiveness of the Chinese PEV subsidy program.•A vehicle choice model is used to predict PEV market share under various policies.•The 2.5% PEV market share in 2017 resulted in new vehicle fleet fuel economy improving by ~2%.•The current PEV subsidy costs $1.90 per additional liter of gasoline saved.•Eliminating/increasing subsidies for high/low income buyers could lower cost per additional PEV.</abstract><cop>Kidlington</cop><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><doi>10.1016/j.eneco.2020.104773</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0140-9883
ispartof Energy economics, 2020-05, Vol.88, p.104773, Article 104773
issn 0140-9883
1873-6181
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2443645128
source Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete; PAIS Index
subjects Air pollution
Air pollution measurements
Budgets
Computer simulation
Consumers
Cost analysis
Costing
Decision making models
Electric vehicles
Energy economics
Fleet fuel economy
Fuel economy
Gasoline
Greenhouse effect
Greenhouse gases
Impact strength
Income
Low income groups
Market shares
Plug-in electric vehicle
Sales
Simulation
Subsidies
Subsidy
title Effectiveness of China's plug-in electric vehicle subsidy
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-28T06%3A18%3A46IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Effectiveness%20of%20China's%20plug-in%20electric%20vehicle%20subsidy&rft.jtitle=Energy%20economics&rft.au=Sheldon,%20Tamara%20L.&rft.date=2020-05-01&rft.volume=88&rft.spage=104773&rft.pages=104773-&rft.artnum=104773&rft.issn=0140-9883&rft.eissn=1873-6181&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.eneco.2020.104773&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2443645128%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2443645128&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S0140988320301134&rfr_iscdi=true