Do they just provide incentives for drivers to buy electric vehicles? Or is the government actually expecting them to put company-owned electric vehicles on the streets?
Also, they'd likely want to pay EV drivers more, to create the correct incentives to get enough EV vehicles into their "fleet".
This means not only are Uber/Lyft not acquiring any drivers (or just signing up a tiny percentage that have EVs) while they lose a lot of their existing drivers.
These conditions would need to be imposed on taxis as well, for maximal effect. Grandfather in existing taxis, and then past a certain date, new taxis must be EVs.
And your take on the ACA is quite off; it's given healthcare to many more people than previously had.
Guaranteeing and publicizing a better rev share for EVs could drive adoption, although slowly. For quicker adoption, they could set up a wait list for drivers with non-EVs and tell the drivers they can skip the line if they get an EV. For every two EV drivers that sign up, they can also let in three non-EV drivers. When a non-EV driver quits, they reduce their EV deficit; when an EV driver quits, their EV deficit increases.
It will be up to whoever is working on their platforms to procure EVs, and with India’s lack of developed EV production capacity and super high tariffs on imports, this goal completely unworkable by the deadline put forth.
Why is this obvious? If the composition of their fleets is not their business why is it clear that the way they manage their fleets is? I would actually assume that there are probably loads of regulations that already govern the ways Uber can manage its fleet?
And use that tax pool to create programs for acquiring EVs (business or otherwise).
You can even add an exemption to offset the start period by a year or two for cars bought within a year to avoid screwing over people who just invested in a new car for this purpose.
You guys need to understand the impacts of the policies you recommend, because this is why people are against climate change efforts so vigorously.
Around here we already have a law that any taxi drivers (Uber and others included) cannot use a car older than 5 years.
A 1% tax isn't going to help if EVs are twice as expensive, whereas in 20 years time where hopefully EVs are approaching cost parity a 20% tax shouldn't be needed.
But on the other hand you want to broadcast to everyone that in the medium term your taxi will need to be electric, so plan accordingly. Taxes are hard!
They partner with companies owning fleets who rent them to drivers at a low-ish cost. It seems entirely reasonable to put restrictions on the 'fleet'.
Even a significant % of traditional taxis don’t own the cars. The taxi drivers are ‘brokers’ who buy and maintain the vehicles and make a deal with the taxi companies for business (branding, debit/credit card machines, running the phones, etc).
Uber would have to require most new cars from drivers they hire to be electric in order to accomplish this. Otherwise they’ll be forced to get into the fleet buying/maintenance business.
Not in India. The cars operated (usually now owned) by Uber/Ola drivers are considered high end cars and are loaned to the drivers by a cottage industry of agencies which take a cut of the fare (not sure if that cut comes from Uber's side or the driver's share).
‘Surge’ pricing already exists for this reason. Which will be good for electric car owners and Uber, bad for the average consumer rider who will pay higher fees and drivers who can’t afford an electric vehicle will be out of work.
But those same people who call for this type of policy were already outraged at the idea of surge pricing and the service being more exclusive to the middle class and wealthy. I wouldn’t be surprised if this amplifies that. Not only for riders but also for the poor drivers who get excluded because they can’t afford a new electric car.
Of course this policy is a bit of a gamble that those 4dr electric cars will be feasible and economical for your average Uber driver to own. It’s possible costs will be similar in 5yrs and won’t add too much expenses which will roll down hill.
Adjust conditions as necessary so that you hit your target (while also trying to minimize service disruption).
Because Uber drivers can't make money if they can't accept jobs, this creates an incentive for drivers to have an electric vehicle. They can get jobs others can't.
Eventually, the market should even work out the correct pricing. There's already a mechanism to pay more when drivers are in short supply. If the supply gets restricted because gasoline cars are sometimes ineligible, compensation has to go up (assuming Uber doesn't want to make customers wait forever for a ride).
Since this is primarily aimed at foreign companies operating in India, may be there could be some success, unless they bribe out of this.
https://www.economist.com/asia/2018/09/27/indias-government-...