Because I can think of a few other externalities that help non-EV far more than the ones you mentioned (not taxing them for ruining our health and climate, for a start).

This all seems an overdue correction to me. But I'd go further and support non-individual transportation more, too.

Where does the headline suggest that? It simply states the makeup of sales.

I think it's much more newsworthy that 40% of cars sold use petrol, when they cost DOUBLE because of taxes.

But because of their tax exempt status, the price premium for electrics is much smaller in Norway than in most other countries.

One small thing which I've started to really appreciate is the almost non-existing engine noise. So relaxing driving it.

Also the superior acceleration comes in handy many times.

Also, I'm not sure what the OP is on about with this:

not taxing them for ruining our health and climate, for a start

Since electric cars aren't taxed, either, that's just playing with numbers.

Ditto for construction vehicles, which rarely travel long distances, often want to be heavy for greater traction, and can have surprisingly low power output. (The Cat D5K2 weighs 20,000 pounds but only has a 105 HP engine: https://www.cat.com/en_US/products/new/equipment/dozers/smal... )

I can't speak for Norway, but in the United States it is very common for Ambulances to travel difficult roads and sometimes non-roads. They have heavy-duty engines for a reason.

In terms of the technology, I don't see anything stopping those from happening right now.

A tesla is still around 800k NOK which is a little less than twice the average annual gross salary or a quarter house (unless you live around Oslo or Stavanger).

I'm driving a toyota avensis myself, the test drive of a model s didn't give a good impression. I'm also not prepared to buy a car that expensive, even with taxes my toyota was 350k NOK. Hopefully there will be long range electric cars from some other manufacturer soon. I do have some hope for the solid battery tech that toyota is developing now.

And specifically in regards to Norway, the country exports its oil to other countries and owns its wealth to oil, being one of the largest exporters. So while headlines on electric car adoption are nice, they really miss the big picture.

More sustainable than replacing them with more gas cars?

It is not uncommon for a car too double its cost as it is being taxed upon import.

Hence, in a number of other markets a $50k Tesla 3 is competing against a $25k (or whatever) Golf.

In Norway, a $50k Tesla 3 is competing against a $50k Golf.

(The numbers are just pulled out of a hat, but they illustrate the point; Norway is a very lucrative market to sell premium electric cars in as the tax advantages relative to fossil cars make premium EVs about as expensive as run-of-the-mill fossils - and they have a few other advantages like reduced tolls, driving in bus lanes &c.

Id rather phrase that doubling their cost (making their relative value much lower).

For all practical purposes the electricity here is 100% clean except for emissions occurring during construction. Huge concrete dams add quite a bit of CO2 to the atmosphere when curing.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_sector_in_Norway

Norway's oil wealth mostly goes towards a massive public sector and a very comprehensive social safety net, and it doesn't enter the economy directly -- only in the shape of a 3% dividend from previously invested oil tax money.

So what? It’s still lost revenue for the government. 60% of the car sales won’t give any taxes. And they still have to maintain roads and infrastructure for all those cars.

They are able to afford because the oil industry creates lots of businesses hotels and jobs and they pay taxes on their income. Which is a huge part of Norwegian economy. Imagine the economy of Norway without oil it would not have been so rich. Probably the closest example is Denmark they already abandoned the tax benefits for EVs. Because it’s a huge part of tax revenue the government can’t simply give up.

It's probably not going to happen when America is led by a president who is making really incisive arguments against renewable energy like

> And you know, don’t worry about wind, when the wind doesn’t blow, I said, “What happens when the wind doesn’t blow?” Well, then we have a problem.

without anyone taking him to task for it.

Edit: with oil being the highest export

The wording is not lacking, you just need to try better, or you would sound like an ignorant person.

And it's a beautiful province full of wonderful people, in my humble opinion. (So is B.C. I'm from Ontario, for what it's worth.)