Outlook - The future of electric vehicles in Sri Lanka.

Now that the Green Frontiers mission we started in December 2015 has reached it's objectives, the fast charging network of the country is reasonably spread out covering most of main routes and main outstation locations... and we have maintained and kept all this alive for more than 3 years. Moreover, this was done while keeping to low rates of Rs 50-60 rate and without enforcing membership fees.

It's now time to evaluate what's the impact has been and what lies for the future of EVs in the country.

EV s on their hey day - @ Green Frontiers, Battaramulla -

For the moment, it looks like charging and range anxiety is not as big issues as they were. There are few new players who has entered into fast charging, CEB is also there. Several people are experimenting with battery solutions, Service providers and spare parts vendors are emerging etc.. Petrol vehicle taxes have gone up. One may think EVs might make a comeback. However, the looks can be deceiving...

With the help of many partners and brave individuals and support from the community, we may have managed to prevent EVs from totally collapsing for 3 years, without any government help, but that's all there is to it. There is a limitation on what few individuals or an organization can do, in the absence of a national policy and active government help. Everywhere in the world where EVs has succeeded, that has happened only with active government help. EVs has not thrived in anywhere yet, without some form of state help.

In Sri Lanka, EVs have started to come in numbers in 2015 when the import tax was just 5%. By around end of that year, the number of pure electrics and plugin electrics were around 4500. Then in November 2015 budget, the government has introduced the draconian new EV tax which suddenly penalize an EV import to as much as 50% of CIF value. Subsequent budgets and ministers boasted they have helped EVs but they were only number games. Final actual tax was always around 40-50% and to this date, the total number of EVs in the country stand only around 5000. The progress was virtually stopped in November 2015 and remains the same.

When new arrivals of cars are scarce, any new investor, service provider or business will think twice before entering into EV sector. Market growth, which is a key indicator of any business analysis is simply not there. With this background, it is unavoidable that even the existing EV related businesses to be winding down. Fast chargers do not have enough cars on roads to sustain their business, once the existing chargers which are outside of warranty periods (that is most of the chargers in here) need to import parts to replace broken ones, most investors are bound to ask the question whether it's worth it. Same goes for other areas of support. New battery replacement related experiments and investments might also slow down. All this would affect the second-hand car market of EVs -which is already struggling- in a very adverse manner.

All above issues will be non existant and EVs would thrive if only the EV tax is reduced at least partially. Therefore, the future and sustainability of EVs in here is going to be critically and directly depend on this years budget which is due in few days/weeks. Without a noticeable reduction of the EV tax, this environmentally vital sector will face a certain slow and painful demise in this year itself.

One may think, there are other helps the government can do. We do not believe so. Most things some expect the government to do are actually not beneficial and even damaging. For instance, CEB has started put up fast chargers, one may think this is a good move, but this is Sri Lanka and here's how the situation will play out in the end. We are a notorious country for government waste, mismanagement and corruption. Sri Lankan Air lines, Mihin Lanka, Railway, CTB, Ceypetco, CEB are just few examples. One minister has said once that the total problem of Sri Lankan economy can be equated to the loss at CEB. Ceypetco, Sri Lankan airlines and other organizations listed also are very much capable of profit making but instead, they remain as burdens on tax payer and huge black holes which gobbles up our resources. Why ? the reason is that governments can not do business.

Let's take fast charging. Very expensive brand of fast chargers arrived years after the tender proceedings, installed many months after arrival, some says that even the warranty periods are now expired. Some stations are still not even operational. Even if they become operational, how long they would remain so, who would take care of maintenance and proper operations? will a government institute which has other high priority tasks put on them will be passionate and dedicated to operating charging stations fluently for a long time? experience on our government service tells us otherwise. This is no body's fault. A government is inherently not suited do businesses.

One day, there is a good chance that these expensive stations will be tendered and sold out cheaply due to small maintenance issues accumulated over many months and that would be a tremendous waste of public money. If the government or the CEB really wanted to encourage and promote EVs in here, they could have simply, granted a favorable electricity tariff to charging stations. proper supply lines which don't cause voltage fluctuations and equipment damage. While one department of the government is putting a tax and preventing EVs from coming here, another department of the same government is importing and putting up fast chargers for those very EVs the first department is discouraging!

So it's our understanding and experience that the only and most effective way for the government to encourage and promote EVs in here is by reducing the import tax. Nothing else is needed and anything else will not be as effective. When more vehicles start to come, other services will naturally appear and develop. There is no need for the government to take the burden of importing batteries, putting up fast chargers, service stations etc. Those would just be avenues for public money wastage only. Government's main job is to provide legislation, policy and overseeing of proper implementation of those policies.

We have done our best for the past 3 years to keep things together... the ball is now with the government, which is still not too late to save the electric vehicle.

Big brother sacrifices life for the younger. Near dead Leaf battery revives the Shifeng!

A near spent Leaf battery may have a SOH around 50%, It's range may have gone down below 100km, writings may be on the wall, yet it is still a powerful battery. It may not enough for the power hungry 80kw LEAF motor, but there are plenty other applications out there for those, it is still a very useful and powerful Li battery. 

This reminds us a selfless organ donor, end of one could be a new beginning for another!

In last post, (Here) we have heard about an old warrior who still got fight in him. Even earlier, we
 have posted about Chinese EV Shifeng (Here), which is lead acid battery. Now, today's post is
 about the final sacrifice by the old warrior.  

Used Leaf batteries are still a game changer for the 10kw little motor of Shifeng. This car had 12 lead acid battereis each weigh about 35 kg, a whopping 420kg in total which is about half of the total weight of the car itself! By changing these batteries for Lithium by a used Leaf, little one get several hundred kg of weight removed, a more powerful battery pack, ability to regenerative braking and also the faster L2 charging time. If that's not all, one day it may even enable fast charging!




This type of a converted Shifeng could even reach 200km of a range! not too bad for a small 
country like ours. So, if you are considering of removing your used LEAF battery, may be 
worthwhile talking to folks at Shifeng Owners group on FB, there might be a win-win 
arrangement!

When we visited Shifeng Facttory in Shangdong China, they were actually surprised to hear 
that not only we do lithium conversion in here, but on to Regenerative breaking as well! 

Therefore, this article will not be  complete without mentioning few names of individuals without their contribution, This progress in our country would not be there right now. 

Mr Bulathsinhala who is no stranger to EV owners has done me the conversion for just 
Rs 40 000/=  My friend, professor NK Gunewardena as always helped and encouraged this
transfer so much so that it finally happened even before the time frames I was planning myself. 


Mr Saman Malagama deserves a big praise for figuring out the regenerative breaking in Shifeng. 

Mr Priyantha Geeganage is another pioneer in providing battery services for both LEAF and Shifeng.

Our dear friends Thiwanka and Pratharshan also deserve some mentioning for all encouragements, help and knowledge sharing. 

Mr Nalaka Kumarapeli is another name which we might hear more in a future post!
Just to show that we have no shortage of expertise, technical know-how and human resources with us, here locally. There is no need to look abroad for solutions!

Next will be about a new battery solution for the LEAF. The Old warrior needs to be 
revived. 

That may be for another post...

The old warrior who still got a fight in him.. Never say die!

This was brought to Sri Lanka exactly 3 years ago. At the time it said it has done only 7000 km. Fifty-Five thousand more kilometers later, it is now a veteran near 63000 km, with no less than 6 battery bars already gone!

How come 6 battery bars go down in such a low mileage? That's because this may be one of most tormented Nissan Leaf cars in the country.

It has been used to experiment, test, configure and troubleshooting, repair of most of Fast Chargers in the country. When Setec engineers came to meet and install our very first charger back in December 2015, this guy was extensively used to experiment and test it.

When it was charged 100% but the testing is not completed yet, we ran some distance to discharge the battery a bit so the charger can use it again. Whenever a new fast charger is installed or an existing one upgraded, repair, this old friend was obediently there to test it again and again, until the job is completed. We knew that's not the best usage scenario for the car battery but had no other option.

Most of its own battery life was sacrificed in the service of fast charging network in the country. I don't think it will mind it too much. Service definitely was not in vain! As a country, we now have one of best FC coverage in the world (certainly in the region!), not many countries can boast of this many fast chargers per car. (Those whol like to read about my previous experiments with green cars and what happened to them, reviews, You can read from the articles in this blog. Personal experiences on Prius and Shifeng.)

Anyway.. back to the story, I haven't used the car recently for long-term trips since I did not think it is capable of making them as it used to do in the past. After all, the battery is less than half it was used to be. This new year season forced us to use it once again for long-term trips and with great suspense, we started the journey from Galle, on new years day!

I was planning to charge few times along the way since the car was carrying 300kg of people and luggage as well. Yet, it exceeded 100km easily, even with a 6 bar down battery, carrying 300kg!

This guy needs a battery overhaul, I did not have the time to look into it for past few months even though we desperately needed that. Now, will look seriously into it.

That reminds me the first time I was looking for a fast charge for my car. At that time, I was told Rs 25 000 membership fee and then a Rs 70 per unit rate is required. We just decided to bring in 2 fast chargers of our own, break the monopoly, sell the fast chargers back and go on with our lives. At least that was the idea and the rest, as they say, was history. Those two fast chargers still providing service in the network which is now nearing 30 fast chargers. Both memberships and high rates are now a thing of past.

So, what will happen this time, when we try to replace batteries for the first time?

One thing is sure, if the existing solutions are not good/affordable enough, then we will create a new solution for all! Maybe the now battery depleted old warrior still has a part to play in that too. :-)

Only time will tell.....

Is a Tesla car really a symbol of Green in here ?

In a previous post, we discussed RRR and how to spot fake environmentalists  damages they do and some associated mis conceptions.

That got us thinking....

I am a fan of Elon Musk and Tesla. It's a great car but it's not yet a car for the masses, it's a car for the super rich, even more so in here. It may be a symbol of green in California, but here in Colombo, it's a symbol of luxury, wealth, comfort and general poshness. There may be nothing inherently wrong in that list, however, greenness or environmentalism is certainly not one belong in that category. Remember, the first R, indulgence and luxury is bit far away from that. there has been some discussions in local circles recently about the time a Tesla taking for a full charge in a normal fast charging station here in Sri Lanka.

Here is our take on the matter : if a tesla comes to a GF network station, we would may be take few pictures of it, have a nice chat with the owner and have a good look at the car too, and we would enjoy that time but at the end of it, we will simply have to ask the car to get to it's home. (may be charge it a tiny little bit so it has just enough to reach the nearest park or it's home). We wouldn't block our fast charger which is still a scarce commodity (for the masses) for hours on behalf for someone who can easily afford one at home (if one could afford a Tesla, why not a 20kw personal charger ?)

Good Elon knows this, that's why he is designing the new model 3 which is supposed to be a car for the masses.

Now that one we WILL treat as a symbol of greenness along with other EVs. We are waiting to charge one...

Your thoughts ?

Pretending Environmentalists - Identify friends and foes of EVs

When the CEO of the company I was working in long time ago, was explaining about results of the latest funding round of the company (which was doing good at the moment), we asked who are the people who are in line to fund us so far. 'A flower attracts all sorts of insects, you know.." came the quick and entertaining answer.. we laughed.

If environmentalism is a flower (a fashionable one too these days), it attracts all sorts of insects right now. Some of whom are a help to the flower, some of whom help themselves but their activities either indirectly helping the flower or at least does it no harm. There are another category of insects which are just helping themselves in such greedy fashion that they are actually damaging the flower itself.

This remind us of that lion who said 'I love vegetarians!' False environmentalists are such that when they say they are environmentalists, what they really mean is that they want to make money out of environmentalism and from environmentalists. Unfortunately, some of those do it by so unethical and opportunistic ways that the process can only be described as more or less of a robbery. Taking advantage of, deceiving and robbing of environmentalists, can not be doing much good towards environmentalism.

There are many ways we can identify false environment lovers. One is the triple R. Well, the three good concepts of Reduce, Re-use, Recycle as put forward by Green Peace. Even though it sounds like simplistic, it in fact has a deep philosophy.

We can not  save our planet or the environment without some sort of reducing the consumption, simply because the planet has limited resources against a growing population who needs more and more. It's a philosophy in one end where our instincts of consuming more, going for luxury, more expensive and bigger has to be transformed into much softer and refined form of taste where we learn to appreciate the finer aspects of life and take joy in consuming sparingly. Learning to practice moderation in things against indulgence. It needs wisdom, intellect, education and self restraint. Such shift in mentality will create a long lasting and sure way of saving the planet. For such a society, concepts of re-use and recycle will also come naturally. In a way it's just a matter of being sensitive towards the world and others who live on it.

There can not be an environment lover without a person inside who is practicing reducing/moderation in things. If we are not keen in reducing, what chance we got to combat with carbon emissions, global warming or green house effects for example ? how to protect dwindling forests and habitats of others, depleting resources and fish in seas.. etc.

On the other hand it is very easy to spot businesses which has set up, designed and tuned to opportunistically make money out of environmentalists, EV lovers/owners, people who like to migrate to Solar power etc.

In case of EVs (as an example), cars are relatively new, owners are few and they all need charging options. Once you buy a car you need to rely on someone for fast charging. In developed countries, charging is available for free or at very low cost. In such cases, it is natural to do it via a membership scheme. Now, how are we to identify a business in these parts of the world where charging is not free, not even fair by the rate and still charging memberships as well ? In early days there will be fewer service stations, spare parts vendors etc.. If one is keen on making money at any cost one could use the early monopoly to raise pricing into such levels (knowing that the customers have limited choice) that it becomes almost a day light robbery but still legal and can get away with.

Can such people, organisations and businesses be categorised as green or environment friendly ? only common aspect between them and an environment lover is that they both deal in the same technologies and options. However, one is using those with the intention of helping the planet while the other is with the intention of making money only. A lion who deals with vegetarian animals is not a vegetarian itself! When the lion says he 'loves vegetarians' he means he loves to eat them!

Environmentalists and early adopters into new (green or not) technologies need to be careful of pretending 'environmentalists'. Their activities more often than not are more harmful to the good cause than activities of those who are direct foes themselves. Direct foes like Big Oil, pollutants, companies who defy conservation laws are easier to identify and hence easier to fight with in the long run. However, fake 'friends' who sneak in as environmentalists and then destroy emergence of new technologies and movements are hard to deal with and the amount of damage they do can be high too. Sometimes they may not aware themselves about the harm they do, but we need to.

Lets take another example.  If we consider the EV sector in here, it is a sensitive time. People were (at least before the budget) thinking of switching into but are cautious about charging points, cost of electricity, spare parts etc. Still the brave ones and early adopters along with environment sensitive individuals take the plunge. Imagine this sensitive environment and add a fake environmentalist into this fragile eco system. A one who says he is helping EVs and providing related services but at a very high cost so he can make maximum profits before the real competition sets in.

If the fake 'green' company managed to get it's way you will see high prices for charging, memberships and then higher cost for servicing and equipment. Now the traditional automative industry can easily point out to the high costs EVs have to go through and mathematically prove to the masses that EVs are actually more expensive to operate and own. In addition, lot of potential early adopters getting discouraged and move away from EVs just after having a look at the charging cost, service cost etc. If this goes on for a while and a fake(s) becomes a monopoly, the entire industry will die out before it even see the day light. That would be a nip in the bud even the petroleum industry would be proud of, if they managed to achieve it. Petrol car dealers would be happy too.

This is not an exaggeration. Here are some numbers if we need more proof to convince our selves. Imagine we charge Rs70 for a unit of electricity to charge a EV. Now, a single unit is normally will take us for about 7 kms. So the cost for one km would be Rs 10, and everybody knows a hybrid car and even a good petrol car would beat that. So for whom are we supporting by enforcing such unfair pricing models on EV owners ?

Imagine there is a Rs 5000 annual charging for EV owners. Is this membership fee is to develop the charging infra structure ? if so, what exactly is and where is that infrastructure after all these months ? That money has clearly went on as personal profit for someone. All though we could argue whether that's a fair/ethical business or not, there shouldn't be an argument at all whether that's a environmental friendly business or not. This is the way to kill EVs, not the way to promote it!

How do other countries and communities deal with such fake do gooders ? there is one recent example which comes to mind where a pharmaceutical company tried to raise the cost of a drug in such a huge magnitude that it caused an outcry world wide. Public awareness has resulted in total failure of such evil attempts by that company that they received swift justice. You can follow the story in here. In that example, even though that company was a pharmaceutical company dedicated into that field including research, they were clearly not an asset or a positive for the improvement of healthcare of people.

Martin Shkreli is the founder and chief executive of Turing Pharmaceuticals, 
which raised the price of the drug Daraprim to $750 a tablet from $13.50. 

CrediPaul Taggart/Bloomberg, via Getty Images

Likewise, just because someone is in the EV sector, doesn't make them green. Just because someone has to unwillingly drop their bad habits and pricing models temporarily due to public outcry, doesn't make them green or good all of a sudden. History, is an indication on where the real motives are.

DC fast charging, how bad are you really ?

This post is for electric vehicle owners and fans. The question asked is a frequently asked question in forums and discussions. I guess it is also one of those nagging questions every vehicle owner silently asking himself every time he/she waiting at quick charge station while the green car silently filling itself up...

There is a reason why this question is so frequent, it is because the EV industry, powerful all electric car batteries (they are generally more powerful than hybrid vehicle batteries) and specially the concept of fast charging at commercial scale were still a recent phenomena that there hasn't been enough time to do conclusive testing and arrive at conclusive answers.

However, this is no longer the case. Recently several research, tests and analysis with medium term data collection has been done, to such a degree that we now do have some data to answer this question. Yea, there could still be some nagging minor doubt here and there on exact numbers, but in general the question can be reasonably evaluated.

In older days (about 5 years ago or more), understanding was that fast charging may damage the battery a bit over long time but no one was sure by exactly how much by over 8-10 years of usage, since lack of data. Nissan and Tesla both now seems to be thinking that the long term battery degradation due to quick charging is not as bad as previously thought. Infact they now think that the total number of miles travelled is the main factor affecting battery life than the method of charging (L2 or L3). You can see this by comparing Nissan Leaf owners manual (UK) in 2011 with the one they issued in 2015

 2011 LEAF owner's manual:

Use the normal charging or trickle charging methods to charge the Li-ion battery and minimize the use of public Fast Charge or Quick Charger.
Avoid exceeding 70-80% state of charge when using frequent (more than once per week) public Fast Charge or Quick Charging.
NISSAN recommends that quick charging not be performed more than once a day

2015 LEAF owner's manual:

NISSAN recommends using normal charging for usual charging of the vehicle. Use of quick charge should be minimized in order to help prolong Li-ion battery life.
Avoid sustained high battery temperatures (caused, for example, by exposure to very high ambient temperatures or extending highway driving with multiple quick charges).

Note how soft the wording in 2015 version of the manual (compared to strict warnings in 2011), also they are putting more emphasis against high temperatures instead. Nissan web site actually goes further and even recommends fast charging.

See here Note this section specifically.

"0% TO 80% IN 30 MINUTES USING RAPID CHARGERS

Rapid Charging at electric car charging stations allows a LEAF to charge from 0% to 80% in approximately 30 minutes.  Available across almost the entire UK motorway network, you can also find them in Nissan Dealerships, IKEA and Waitrose, plus various other locations.

Nissan recommend the use of the Ecotricity Electric Highway as it’s currently free (you will need to register first) and provides access to a wide range of Rapid Chargers to help you on those longer journeys. For example, using the Electric Highway on a journey from London to Bristol could cost you absolutely nothing!"

Word "recommends" is now used without restraint but at the same time they have managed to sneak in the "0% to 80%" just to make sure! This kind of summarises the present understandings and research stats.

Infact, even as early as 2012, they have got bit bolder. Speaker here is Mark Perry, Nissan North America's Director of Product Planning. 

At first he uses strong assured phrases such as "Nissan is designed with fast charging in mind', "2-3 times of fast charging daily, no problem", "car is intelligent enough to protect it self" etc but when grilled, says there could be small percentage difference over 10 years, so the optimal is to charge up to 80% but still he maintains there is no significant damage in 100% charging (except 'small percentages over 10 year') and go for it if we really need it. 

This is another section from the manual :

• Info on charging in LEAF Owner's Manual: "Overview" / "Efficient use of your vehicle" / "Li-ion battery life" section.
  Nissan recommends:
  • Only charging to 80% in order to maximize battery life:
    "Long life mode
    NISSAN recommends charging the Li-ion battery using the long life mode to help maximize the Li-ion battery useful life. Long life mode can only be set using the charging timer function. The long life mode is set by changing the [% Charge] to [80% Charge (Improves Battery Longevity)] using the following procedure." [7]
    Furthermore, the LEAF's warranty includes an exclusion regarding Li-Ion battery being charged full on a daily basis "despite the lithium-ion battery keeping a high state of charge level (98-100%)." [8]
  • Allow the battery charge to be below at least 80% before charging.
  • Avoid leaving vehicle for over 14 days where the battery charge state is zero or near zero.
  • Allow the vehicle and Li-ion battery to cool down after use before charging.

• If vehicle will not be used for long period of time, NISSAN recommends charging with "long life mode" (charging only to 80%, see above) and to charge once every 3 months

Here, there is an important piece. Note that the 0-80% rule is a general health guideline which is applicable even for L2 charging! It is not associated with quick charging only.

Anyway, Nissan may be interested in its business and if the battery died after 8 years, the burden will be on users so we need some neutral party to come up with test data. Given that it is still 5 years since the launch of commercial level EVs, those are hard to come by.

I managed to find one such at following : http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy15osti/63700.pdf (Let us know if you find more.) Here too they agree that the long term impact is not significant.

Another angle to look at the issue is to ask the question 'what happens at quick charging which may cause problems for the battery'. The answer is, high power is associated with high temperatures! High temperatures as we know are not good for batteries. Larger the power, higher the temperatures can go while charging. This is why no body even asking the question of damage due to slow L2 charging. (however the 'optimal' habit of not charging more than 80% applies to the L2 charger as well as mentioned earlier.)

Therefore, if we are really concerned, it would be prudent to minimize whatever damage and risk by using less power as possible. 40KW would be better than 60KW, 30KW would be better than 40, 20 would be bette than 30, and L@ charging would be safest of all etc but we can not wait long period to charge the battery if we are to use our cars in practical day to day usage. So at some point we will have to draw a line and find the correct balance between practical usage and ultra safety over long term.

Personally, I myself of the opinion that 20KW provides us that balance. It is fast enough for most of our requirements (I'm yet to find a case that it exceeds one hour for a charge), cheap enough to afford fair prices to EV owners, safe enough for batteries against high temperatures since it uses less power. However, I would not write off 30KW either.

Using beyond that (40KW or more), I think is a mistake for Sri Lanka. Here are the reasons :
1) Our grid provides only 60A max with 3 phase, beyond that you need a dedicated paid transformer.
2) If you go for such a transformer, then that huge cost will usually come to the end customers but why should EV owners pay for transformers ?
3) If you do not go for a transformer then you can draw only 60A, meaning your 40KW charger is actually under utilized. If thats the case, why should end customers pay more for power they are not even using ?
4) Risks associated with long term battery life. (however minor they can be)

To summarize then :
1) When possible, charge only up to 80% (whether it is L2 or L3)
2) If you really have to charge up to 100% to get the range, don't worry too much over it but at the same time, try not to do it too often either, just to be on the safe side.
3) let the battery cool down after the drive before charging. (since we know that the temperature is the enemy)
4) less power the better for the battery so whenever possible, use lesser KW if you are very concerned about long term battery life.
5) Reduce amounts of occurrences where the battery is discharged very low. If it goes too low, let it cool down a bit and charge. Dont keep the battery in Low of High charge states for longer durations.

Electric Vehicles - Facts and Myths

I was out of blogging and social media for a long time (for good, so I thought). So many things have happened in last few years. Few years ago, I have written about Toyota Prius which got some discussion going on about the hybrid vehicles. Well, as they say a lot of water has flown under the bridge!

Just thought of coming back and write this since I have heard so many untruths recently about electric cars that it was almost hard not to have a say in some sort. So many have commented on these already, but I will just for the record add my 2 cents here as well.

1) Sri Lankan electricity grid can not take so many electric vehicles.
People who say this belongs to two categories, those who don't know enough and those who knows but knowingly and willingly trying to mislead others due to vested interests.

Some of electric car owners have already opted for net metering with solar panels, and many others are also planning to do so. Market analysis show that utilisation of solar power (via net metering) is so high among EV owners. So it is not correct to say that EV owners are a burden on the grid. Besides, Sri Lanka has a surplus of electricity at off peak hours (nights after 10PM) that anybody charging on those times are not a problem to the national grid at all. Not to mention the fact that new coal power plants are producing enough electricity for the country.

2) Electricity is produced using hydrocarbons so charging cars from electricity has no benefit in terms of environment or carbon emissions.

We can excuse people who say this out of lack of subject knowledge, however I suspect there are quite a few who propagate this knowing very well that it is not true at all. Compared to the combustion engines of motor vehicles, power plants are efficient by an order of magnitude! Even if we use electricity produced by a power plant using diesel or coal, it is still much more clean and will be using much less hydrocarbons than we pumping from the shed and burning in vehicle engines which are no way near the efficiency levels of industrial power plants. This can be so easily verified by a quick google search or from wikipedia that a further discussion on this is utterly unnecessary.

One last thing.. should we really need to mention that there is a seizable component of electricity produced without hydrocarbons ?

3) Importing more vehicles is not good for the national economy as we loose foreign currency.
True, but why then target EVs specifically! 2.5 million tax is not really a tax, impact of that is so huge that it cant be described any other way than as a measure to kill an emerging sector at its birth!

Surely, petrol/diesel vehicles could have been taxed more and some concessions could have given to environment friendly EVs and Hybrids. As a nation, we would have save money from petroleum imports. This is such a no brainer and something almost all other countries in the world are following.

4) EV owners who use solar power at home for charging will not be contributing towards the economy.
It is sad and disappointing to hear that some of learned businessmen and politicians have even entertained this thought! the argument goes like, EV owners if moved into using net metering with solar panels, will not be using petrol sheds and will not be paying electricity bills. So they can no be taxed and hence they are not contributing to the economy.

Do we really have to provide an answer to this argument ? When learned people comes up with this type of arguments we can just get an idea about how high the amount of vested interests could be.

Any sane person will not fail to see the huge positive impact a single person can make by becoming petroleum independent. Such a person will be an asset for an country and will be saving a huge amount of money annually which would otherwise be burned in a car or in a power plant to provide his energy needs.

Now, basic economics tell us that such a person will then spend that money (he has saved) in investments, savings or consume goods/services (which the others in the society has produced). That is certainly not a bad thing for the economy. Taxing should be a tool to improve a society, not to destroy one. If we still need to tax such a practice (instead of encouraging more people to follow that path, like other countries are doing), at least we should be finding some other ways to tax without killing off both Solar power and EV usage in one stroke. Almost any measure would have been much better than the one which has actually taken in this case!

Two good trends we have seen in Sri Lanka recently are the use of EVs and use of solar power (PV). Many people have opted for net metering which is a great save for petroleum importing developing country like ours. EVs seemed to encourage that trend further, at last it started to seem like some good things may happen to our economy and environment. It is very rarely one see something which is good for the economy and environment both at the same time. Sadly, this is the hope which is now made to go down in smoke, in favour of the petroleum importers, petrol/diesel car importers and few mega businessmen.

We may be engaging in many industries and businesses in many fields, some policy decisions may hit us on our profit margins here and there. As intellectually honest people we need acknowledge bad decisions and harmful decisions to the country/society even if they benefit us personally in the short term, vice versa.

If certain acts which are harmful for a country seem to benefit us, then that may be an indication that we may be in a wrong business, or engaging in some unethical, unpatriotic or anti-society business practices. This is what we need to say to those who trying to justify/promote the EV tax hike.