Gasoline is cheap – but charging an EV is still cheaper(grist.org)
grist.org
Gasoline is cheap – but charging an EV is still cheaper
https://grist.org/energy/gasoline-is-cheap-right-now-but-charging-an-ev-is-still-cheaper/
84 comments
Every time we get an article about EVs we get commenters here who just like to list the pitfalls, every time, over and over. It's pretty boring. No-body is forcing anyone to buy an EV (yet), so each of us can decide on the merits.
I would love to have one, but I cannot afford one. Well, I could, I could easily get finance, but I wouldn't do it. I think if you live in the US, the way people on HN talk about cars, they must be cheaper there, finance is cheaper and wages are higher, such that you can just get a new one rather than making an agonising decision over months, even years.
We're just about to replace our 15 year old car with a 4 year old 7 seater because the kids are fighting over space in the back too often. There was 1 EV on the market with enough space (as an aside, all newer cars have less space across the width because of more safety features in the doors) and it's 2.5x my budget. A new hybrid is 1.7x my budget. You can buy a hell of a lot of petrol in that price difference, more than we'll use in 10 years of driving. So we'll keep this one until some of our offspring have left and the next car might hopefully be an EV.
I would love to have one, but I cannot afford one. Well, I could, I could easily get finance, but I wouldn't do it. I think if you live in the US, the way people on HN talk about cars, they must be cheaper there, finance is cheaper and wages are higher, such that you can just get a new one rather than making an agonising decision over months, even years.
We're just about to replace our 15 year old car with a 4 year old 7 seater because the kids are fighting over space in the back too often. There was 1 EV on the market with enough space (as an aside, all newer cars have less space across the width because of more safety features in the doors) and it's 2.5x my budget. A new hybrid is 1.7x my budget. You can buy a hell of a lot of petrol in that price difference, more than we'll use in 10 years of driving. So we'll keep this one until some of our offspring have left and the next car might hopefully be an EV.
I think people in the US are just entirely too willing to live in perpetual debt and then whine about how expensive everything is and how they can't retire comfortably.
When people find out that we drive a (totally reliable) 2005 CR-V with 235K miles on it and are going to sell that and replace with a 9 year-old 2015 car, they can't reconcile that with me being "able to afford" a new car if I wanted. To them, the only reason to buy a used car is if you literally could't afford something new. It's madness, but I'm glad they buy/lease new cars so that I can have used cars to choose from later.
When people find out that we drive a (totally reliable) 2005 CR-V with 235K miles on it and are going to sell that and replace with a 9 year-old 2015 car, they can't reconcile that with me being "able to afford" a new car if I wanted. To them, the only reason to buy a used car is if you literally could't afford something new. It's madness, but I'm glad they buy/lease new cars so that I can have used cars to choose from later.
*Thank you*
So much hearsay from people who never really used an EV. Yes, there are drawbacks. But except for extreme long range trips EVs are perfectly usable while being more energy efficient and less prone to breaking down.
So much hearsay from people who never really used an EV. Yes, there are drawbacks. But except for extreme long range trips EVs are perfectly usable while being more energy efficient and less prone to breaking down.
> except for extreme long range trips
I'm writing this comment having just driven about 2000km-long trip with an EV :-) In cold climate (-5C).
It's not my first long trip, either. My key observations (some were surprising to me):
1. You should expect to travel slower, as you will need to make breaks for charging, and the EV world presents an overly-rosy view of ranges. In a long trip, you use the battery from 10% to around 85%, so only 70-75% of your full "range" is usable. In my case rough estimates are a stop every 2h or 250km.
2. It's not a big deal. Especially if you can find a place to charge where you will also eat or drink.
3. I feel significantly better after a trip with those additional stops, than after a trip with uninterrupted several hours of driving.
I'm writing this comment having just driven about 2000km-long trip with an EV :-) In cold climate (-5C).
It's not my first long trip, either. My key observations (some were surprising to me):
1. You should expect to travel slower, as you will need to make breaks for charging, and the EV world presents an overly-rosy view of ranges. In a long trip, you use the battery from 10% to around 85%, so only 70-75% of your full "range" is usable. In my case rough estimates are a stop every 2h or 250km.
2. It's not a big deal. Especially if you can find a place to charge where you will also eat or drink.
3. I feel significantly better after a trip with those additional stops, than after a trip with uninterrupted several hours of driving.
I drove from Houston to San Diego and back in my EV6. It wasn't bad, but in the interests of disclosure, I'll point out some of the caveats (some of which may not apply for those using the Tesla network)
1. Our trip was on major interstates (I10 and I8)
2. Not every charging station had full speed
3. Charging stations weren't so close that I could reliably skip one
4. Range goes way down on open freeways (wind resistance, lack of regen)
5. Charging stations aren't always on the freeway like gas stations, so you may find yourself going into towns and off of the freeway, increasing drive time
6. Charge times weren't bad, but I have one of the fastest charging cars, so literally, YMMV
Overall, in a gas car it would have been a 2 day trip; in my EV, it was more like 2 2/3 days (adjusted our intinerary in SD, else we would have had additional hotel costs). That said, I drove just to prove haters wrong; I'd fly the next time. However, if I had to do a long trip, I'd probably consider renting something else.
1. Our trip was on major interstates (I10 and I8)
2. Not every charging station had full speed
3. Charging stations weren't so close that I could reliably skip one
4. Range goes way down on open freeways (wind resistance, lack of regen)
5. Charging stations aren't always on the freeway like gas stations, so you may find yourself going into towns and off of the freeway, increasing drive time
6. Charge times weren't bad, but I have one of the fastest charging cars, so literally, YMMV
Overall, in a gas car it would have been a 2 day trip; in my EV, it was more like 2 2/3 days (adjusted our intinerary in SD, else we would have had additional hotel costs). That said, I drove just to prove haters wrong; I'd fly the next time. However, if I had to do a long trip, I'd probably consider renting something else.
Seems to me like you proved the haters correct. That is a significant cost on time and money, to recharge. To me this is the biggest downside to an EV. Not too mention, of I rub it off juice, the car pretty much has to be towed.
Will this problems improve? Sure, but until then...
Not entirely. I proved the "good luck when you can't find a charger and have to tow your car" haters wrong. We've moved from the realm of impossible into possible, but we're just not in the convenient territory yet. (akin to the lifecycle of depending on mobile Internet)
It was an EV6 though, not a Tesla. So it had a disadvantage to start with.
> In my case rough estimates are a stop every 2h or 250km... It's not a big deal. Especially if you can find a place to charge where you will also eat or drink.
As a huge proponent of EVs, I have to imagine a major chunk of the population would disagree with you. Most people (in the US, at least) aren't leisurely taking road trips. They are in a hurry, trying not to eat up all 3 weeks of PTO with the annual family road trip. Aside from the inconvenience, finding something to do every 2 hours with a family of 4, like eating or drinking, is liable to become prohibitively expensive, or incredibly boring.
As a huge proponent of EVs, I have to imagine a major chunk of the population would disagree with you. Most people (in the US, at least) aren't leisurely taking road trips. They are in a hurry, trying not to eat up all 3 weeks of PTO with the annual family road trip. Aside from the inconvenience, finding something to do every 2 hours with a family of 4, like eating or drinking, is liable to become prohibitively expensive, or incredibly boring.
When I drove from Houston to San Diego, most of our stops were in the 20 minute range. That said, I have one of faster charging EVs, and we don't have kids.
While extra time for EV charging is annoying, when using a gasoline car you still have to stop every two hours to pee, stretch your legs, and swap drivers. Sitting in an enclosed space for hours on end increases the risk of blood clots. So the actual increase in stopped time is e.g. 30 min to L3 charge to 80% minus the 15 min for a restroom/gasoline/coffee break multiplied by number of stops. So an hour lost per day.
Our family experience is that we stop about every 4 hours, usually limited by the size of the fuel tank. Because I have an EV and a gas car (gas car for road trips), I timed several of our fuel stops on a recent trip. Most were 11-14 minutes, measured from driving onto to off of the gas station property. I tend to do most of the driving, and 11 hours a day is around what I feel comfortable doing. That happens to be the door to door wall-clock time for our trip to my in-laws (766 miles). I'd pay a fair amount to avoid adding another 60-90 minutes to that trip.
> when using a gasoline car you still have to stop every two hours to pee, stretch your legs, and swap drivers
Source?
My longest ICE-powered trip recently was a ~500 mile trip across Europe with precisely one 15 minute break to pee and buy coffee. A total of ~8 hours on the road, and I was driving alone. On the plus side it was a very nice rented Audi.
Source?
My longest ICE-powered trip recently was a ~500 mile trip across Europe with precisely one 15 minute break to pee and buy coffee. A total of ~8 hours on the road, and I was driving alone. On the plus side it was a very nice rented Audi.
My longest BEV trip in one day was 896 miles (1442 km), with about half a dozen short breaks, driving alone. 396 miles longer than your trip in your ICE car. Not sure what your data point is supposed to be proving.
I've done a few long road trips and 2 hours is about the max my kids would go anyway between breaks. Not that I've done it in an EV.
EVs are fantastic for long road trips. Unless you buy your EV from a legacy automaker in which case there is no good charging network.
One thing EVs need to address is the cost of repairs.
Yes an ICE engine needs regular maintenance, but currently that cost savings in an EV is offset by the larger repair costs as well as wait times for repairs (due to parts availability, like dearth of OEM parts, like you can’t go down to NAPA and get parts.
Yes an ICE engine needs regular maintenance, but currently that cost savings in an EV is offset by the larger repair costs as well as wait times for repairs (due to parts availability, like dearth of OEM parts, like you can’t go down to NAPA and get parts.
That like OPs post is also a mixed bag. The high repair costs are largely because of EV manufactures trying out new things, like unibodies that are very expensive to replace, lack of 3rd party mechanics trained on them, and less commonly available parts at auto stores as you mention. The great news is that none of these are inherent with EVs, the traditional manufactures are using more construction in common with their ICE counter-parts and mechanics and parts will become available with time as the market adopts it. The other bonus is that EVs need a lot less maintenance to begin with because they are mechanically much simpler and regenerative breaking does a lot to cut back on wear and tear on the parts that do experience more issues like tires and brakes.
It’s true that it’s not inherent, however, the unfortunate thing is that they’re being built like this and it makes it costly to repair them.
If they fix the above then yes, repair costs should come down and make their total cost of ownership make sense.
As it is people try to convince others that because there are fewer moving parts on the drive train, that TCO is in theory lower, in practice it’s not yet due to all the above issues you mentioned.
If they fix the above then yes, repair costs should come down and make their total cost of ownership make sense.
As it is people try to convince others that because there are fewer moving parts on the drive train, that TCO is in theory lower, in practice it’s not yet due to all the above issues you mentioned.
I feel like the problem with the current EV offerings is they are basically higher end cars with repair bills you'd expect. Not like a lower end commuter car. I also think the race to add more and more features to cars means the cost of repairs for anything non legacy is higher than people might assume. As in older trucks were easy and cheap to repair. And that is no longer true at all.
EVs or only Teslas?
I have a suspicion that that is true primarily for Teslas.
I have a Toyota plug-in hybrid, which theoretically is an EVs as well as an ICE car, and its repair/maintainance is similar to that of an ICE.
The high cost of Tesla repair is due to their vertical integration, perhaps limited capacity devoted to spares and monopoly over who repairs (max rent selling from repair). EVs should be cheaper to repair and maintain.
I have a suspicion that that is true primarily for Teslas.
I have a Toyota plug-in hybrid, which theoretically is an EVs as well as an ICE car, and its repair/maintainance is similar to that of an ICE.
The high cost of Tesla repair is due to their vertical integration, perhaps limited capacity devoted to spares and monopoly over who repairs (max rent selling from repair). EVs should be cheaper to repair and maintain.
Do you have a credible source for B? Because it isn't necessarily true. As for the parts that are there, they fail more often (see TUV reliability index), they are less servicable and they require specialized people to fix them. Just wait until you get out of your warranty period.
I gas up a 40L tank once a month in climate where -15 happens for about two or three months. The tires are modest as the car doesn’t weigh much. The winter tires last a while and I just switched to my second pair of summers. Maintenance on a gas powered sedan is pretty minimal as my Honda is extremely reliable. I plan to run the car into the ground until the salt eats it alive. There’s a lot of sedans like mine in my neighbourhood and only few have been rushing to electric. I plan to get a Corolla hybrid next if that’s a thing.
Edit: my insurance is more than my gas bill but pretty cheap. All electric cars cost a lot more to insure here because of repair costs I’m guessing
Edit: my insurance is more than my gas bill but pretty cheap. All electric cars cost a lot more to insure here because of repair costs I’m guessing
It is a thing – I have one
I wonder why somebody downvoted you.
Off the cuff, running a car to the end and then switching to a hybrid seems fairly environmentally friendly, right?
I don’t think we want to prematurely take reasonably recent small cars (since you say your car is light, I assume it is small) off the road if that means building a bunch of new electric ones… especially for someone who drives little enough to gas up once per month.
Off the cuff, running a car to the end and then switching to a hybrid seems fairly environmentally friendly, right?
I don’t think we want to prematurely take reasonably recent small cars (since you say your car is light, I assume it is small) off the road if that means building a bunch of new electric ones… especially for someone who drives little enough to gas up once per month.
Electric cars are really popular in Norway, and it’s not a warm tropical country in the winter.
EVs are exempt from a 100% tax on conventional cars.
If you have a garage, charging an electric car is supremely convenient. It's like having your own private gas station at home.
In India, cost of running a petrol car is almost 7x that of a electric car. Where i live, the electricity rate is like 7 rs/kwh and gasoline rate is like 100 rs/l.
My earlier gasoline car had an running rate of like 10km/l which turns out to be 10Rs/km price point. While, in an EV, i get like 250 kms minimum on full charge with a 40 kWh battery which is like 1.12 Rs/km. Also simpler maintainance in an EV and much more easier to drive. No vibration and an almost silent drive. Whats there not to like. Not sure why people hate on EV so much here. Even when i use fast chargers in india, the rate is 21 rs/kwh. Which is still 3 times cheaper than using a gasoline car. For reference, the cars were Petrol -> Honda city and EV -> Tata nexon EV Max.
The numbers are based on daily drive in city traffic for 40kms of drive daily.
I charge at home every 4-5 days using the standard 15A-250V socket that is present in every single indian home. So, no matter where i go, i am able to find a socket to charge my car. Whether its a hotel/airbnb/friend's place
I charge at home every 4-5 days using the standard 15A-250V socket that is present in every single indian home. So, no matter where i go, i am able to find a socket to charge my car. Whether its a hotel/airbnb/friend's place
One Tesla owner in the SF Bay Area estimates that it costs more to charge their EV than a high-mpg hybrid, if they had to pay utility rates:
https://old.reddit.com/r/bayarea/comments/191tybu/driving_my...
https://old.reddit.com/r/bayarea/comments/191tybu/driving_my...
In my country electricity is more expensive. Cheapest by far is LNG.
EVs also have much higher costs in repairs, maintenance and car insurance.
EVs also have much higher costs in repairs, maintenance and car insurance.
> EVs also have much higher costs in repairs, maintenance and car insurance.
Not sure about the maintenance cost being higher here. The only things that need regular service are brake and tires as all of the moving parts of an EV are contained within an electric motor assembly that are very reliable across manufacturers.
By contrast, an ICE vehicle is loaded with moving parts, all of which need lubrication, have wear profiles that demand replacement occasionally, need to pass emissions testing, etc.
Not sure about the maintenance cost being higher here. The only things that need regular service are brake and tires as all of the moving parts of an EV are contained within an electric motor assembly that are very reliable across manufacturers.
By contrast, an ICE vehicle is loaded with moving parts, all of which need lubrication, have wear profiles that demand replacement occasionally, need to pass emissions testing, etc.
> Not sure about the maintenance cost being higher
Sixt and Hertz seem fairly sure, and they are the ones with statistically-significant data on this:
https://cleantechnica.com/2023/12/08/sixt-dumping-teslas-due...
https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/hertz-...
Sixt and Hertz seem fairly sure, and they are the ones with statistically-significant data on this:
https://cleantechnica.com/2023/12/08/sixt-dumping-teslas-due...
https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/hertz-...
Sixt seem to have a specific problem with Tesla, not EVs:
> Sixt is directly singling out Tesla here, as it continues to increase its electric fleet,” they write. “The company’s goal is to slowly replace its gasoline and diesel-powered cars until at least 90 percent of its fleet is electric, and it aims to do so by the end of this decade. Unless Tesla improves its quality, collision repair costs, and residual values, the second-largest rental fleet in Europe (and fourth-largest in the U.S.) won’t include cars from the American automaker.”
> Sixt is directly singling out Tesla here, as it continues to increase its electric fleet,” they write. “The company’s goal is to slowly replace its gasoline and diesel-powered cars until at least 90 percent of its fleet is electric, and it aims to do so by the end of this decade. Unless Tesla improves its quality, collision repair costs, and residual values, the second-largest rental fleet in Europe (and fourth-largest in the U.S.) won’t include cars from the American automaker.”
EVs need general battery repair or replacement after minor accidents.
And spare parts are VERY expensive, like $5000 for LCD screen!
And spare parts are VERY expensive, like $5000 for LCD screen!
You should do more research. EVs use less lubrication but they still have to use bearings you know.. and those dry ones wear out way faster then their ICE counterparts which are constantly lubricated.
Maintenance of bearings was a thing from the mid century up until the 80s when automakers starting putting out parts that had a service lifetime that exceeded the service lifetime of the vehicle. When is the last time you had your ICE vehicle in to get bearings repacked or replaced? Outside of actual damage (collision, premature part failure), these parts are typically replaced as a maintenance only in performance or enthusiasts vehicles now.
Also, many bearings in an ICE vehicle use special high-pressure, long-life, “tacky” lubricants that stick and do not usually mix with engine oil or transmission fluid. The bearings on the wheel hub most definitely do not but that’s also a part that both EVs and ICE vehicles have in common (which is also the easiest bearing to replace).
Also, many bearings in an ICE vehicle use special high-pressure, long-life, “tacky” lubricants that stick and do not usually mix with engine oil or transmission fluid. The bearings on the wheel hub most definitely do not but that’s also a part that both EVs and ICE vehicles have in common (which is also the easiest bearing to replace).
From what I know, EVs have lower cost of maintenance and car insurance, and same cost for repairs.
What kind of repairs and maintenance costs did you encounter? So far I paid much less for my EV than a comparable gas car.
I think it is more useful to go by energy cost ratios.
A while back I did the math for Chevy Bolt vs an ICE car that gets 39 mpg.
The results were charging the Bolt would be cheaper per mile than filling the ICE car whenever G/E > 9.4, where G is the price of a gallon of gas and E is the cost of a kW of electricity.
A while back I did the math for Chevy Bolt vs an ICE car that gets 39 mpg.
The results were charging the Bolt would be cheaper per mile than filling the ICE car whenever G/E > 9.4, where G is the price of a gallon of gas and E is the cost of a kW of electricity.
EVs may be great for someone with a home and garage to charge it, but for renters or more normal folks who have to park on the street, no ones going to add hours to their day sitting at a charging station.
Hours a day? More like 30ish minutes once a week.
> Yeah but do they calculate your personal time value in sitting at a charging station for an hour?
An even more interesting calculation would be how much you are shortening your life by standing at a gas pump inhaling carcinogens. Not to mention breathing the exhaust of all the vehicles around you.
LA has some of the worst air quality in the developed world [1]. Do you want to live there and breath that everyday?
[1] https://www.latimes.com/environment/story/2023-04-19/l-a-get...
An even more interesting calculation would be how much you are shortening your life by standing at a gas pump inhaling carcinogens. Not to mention breathing the exhaust of all the vehicles around you.
LA has some of the worst air quality in the developed world [1]. Do you want to live there and breath that everyday?
[1] https://www.latimes.com/environment/story/2023-04-19/l-a-get...
> how much you are shortening your life by standing at a gas pump inhaling carcinogens
[Full disclosure: worked for years in a chemistry lab where we had "proper" risks, including but not limited to real carcinogens]
CDC: "there is no evidence that exposure to gasoline causes cancer in humans"[0]
Petrol and diesel are easy to avoid inhaling, not least because they both stink. It's trivial to avoid any potential risk by turning away from the vehicle while fuelling.
[0] https://wwwn.cdc.gov/TSP/ToxFAQs/ToxFAQsDetails.aspx?faqid=4....
[Full disclosure: worked for years in a chemistry lab where we had "proper" risks, including but not limited to real carcinogens]
CDC: "there is no evidence that exposure to gasoline causes cancer in humans"[0]
Petrol and diesel are easy to avoid inhaling, not least because they both stink. It's trivial to avoid any potential risk by turning away from the vehicle while fuelling.
[0] https://wwwn.cdc.gov/TSP/ToxFAQs/ToxFAQsDetails.aspx?faqid=4....
That link you posted reads almost criminally negligent.
"There is not enough information available to determine if gasoline causes birth defects or affects reproduction"
My god, spend some time in a remote aboriginal community in the 80s and 90s before OPAL fuel was invented and you would have had all the information you'll ever need.
There's a reason they spent millions developing OPAL, and why regular unleaded gasoline (petrol) is illegal in virtually all aboriginal communities.
"There is not enough information available to determine if gasoline causes birth defects or affects reproduction"
My god, spend some time in a remote aboriginal community in the 80s and 90s before OPAL fuel was invented and you would have had all the information you'll ever need.
There's a reason they spent millions developing OPAL, and why regular unleaded gasoline (petrol) is illegal in virtually all aboriginal communities.
According to Wikipedia, the injuries from gasoline in these communities resulted from deliberately using it as an inhalant (to get intoxicated). This can hardly be compared with standing at a gas pump outdoors for five minutes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opal_(fuel)
From that article: "Opal is a variety of low-aromatic 91 RON petrol developed in 2005 by BP Australia to combat the rising use of petrol as an inhalant in remote Indigenous Australian communities. ... Typical unleaded petrol contains 25% aromatics, such as toluene, ortho-xylene and para-xylene. In contrast, Opal contains only 5% aromatics, which means that it has less of the toluene and other solvents which produce the intoxication (or "high") that inhalant users are seeking."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opal_(fuel)
From that article: "Opal is a variety of low-aromatic 91 RON petrol developed in 2005 by BP Australia to combat the rising use of petrol as an inhalant in remote Indigenous Australian communities. ... Typical unleaded petrol contains 25% aromatics, such as toluene, ortho-xylene and para-xylene. In contrast, Opal contains only 5% aromatics, which means that it has less of the toluene and other solvents which produce the intoxication (or "high") that inhalant users are seeking."
I'm not comparing it to standing at a gas pump. I'm talking about this statement on the CDC site you linked:
"There is not enough information available to determine if gasoline causes birth defects or affects reproduction"
Borderline criminal.
"There is not enough information available to determine if gasoline causes birth defects or affects reproduction"
Borderline criminal.
Read an MSDS for unleaded petrol and it's clear one should not mess about with it.
https://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/country-sites/en_au/austra...
Since we're talking about EVs, note that if "electricity" had an MSDS, it would also be full of lawyer-speak warning about risks :)
https://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/country-sites/en_au/austra...
Since we're talking about EVs, note that if "electricity" had an MSDS, it would also be full of lawyer-speak warning about risks :)
In London, many neighborhoods have added charging sockets to the existing streetlight posts. I park on the street and can charge overnight easily and cheaply just by parking on the road and plugging in.
I'm not saying this will work perfectly in every location or for all cities. But it is relatively easy in many areas to add charging ports with existing infrastructure.
I'm not saying this will work perfectly in every location or for all cities. But it is relatively easy in many areas to add charging ports with existing infrastructure.
> I park on the street and can charge overnight easily and cheaply [..]
Q: How much do you pay to charge on-street?
Q: How much do you pay to charge on-street?
Average home electricity prices are 0.29/kwh in London. The street lamp charging costs 0.24/kwh, so actually slightly cheaper for most people than charging at home.
By comparison, a Telsa Supercharger will run about 0.65/kwh here (but is obviously faster) and other brands I've seen as high as 0.85/kwh for rapid charging.
However if you agreed to an electricity plan where you pay floating hourly rates and you can charge at home with the right equipment, you could in theory pay less by only charging at low rate times overnight.
But given the the limited amount of driving I do (basically just weekend trips), the street charging costs are usually so low as to be a rounding error so it is not a big deal either way.
By comparison, a Telsa Supercharger will run about 0.65/kwh here (but is obviously faster) and other brands I've seen as high as 0.85/kwh for rapid charging.
However if you agreed to an electricity plan where you pay floating hourly rates and you can charge at home with the right equipment, you could in theory pay less by only charging at low rate times overnight.
But given the the limited amount of driving I do (basically just weekend trips), the street charging costs are usually so low as to be a rounding error so it is not a big deal either way.
> for renters or more normal folks who have to park on the street
I think categorizing people into "with garages" and "normal" might be a little contentious. A quick search indicates 63% percent of all housing units have a garage or carport[1]. Housing Unit includes apartments and condos. I'm sure it's very geographic, and in large cities the number will be much lower - but many many Americans live in suburbs, where 80% will have garages - this doesn't make them abnormal or particularly wealthy.
[1] https://www.energy.gov/eere/vehicles/fact-958-january-2-2017...
I think categorizing people into "with garages" and "normal" might be a little contentious. A quick search indicates 63% percent of all housing units have a garage or carport[1]. Housing Unit includes apartments and condos. I'm sure it's very geographic, and in large cities the number will be much lower - but many many Americans live in suburbs, where 80% will have garages - this doesn't make them abnormal or particularly wealthy.
[1] https://www.energy.gov/eere/vehicles/fact-958-january-2-2017...
I would also guess that percentage of housing units would be substantially higher if you limited it to homes also owned by people with cars. Both because owning a garage is a lot more desirable if you have a car and homes with garages are in places where people need to drive to get around: there are millions of people in major cities who own neither and have no need for a car.
63% of Americans, own homes and 65% of those homes have garages.
the math is clear on what's more normal
the math is clear on what's more normal
I assumed they weren't in the US, which could make more sense based on where they *do* live.
Where I live in the US having a garage is a luxury. However as you point out having a garage is much more "normal" in the US.
Where I live in the US having a garage is a luxury. However as you point out having a garage is much more "normal" in the US.
No, I still won't buy an EV. EVs are being forced down or throat to, again, have customers make another buy in the name of the earth. Tax the fuck out of China, India, USA for being the biggest polluters, then tax the fuck out of carbon emissions for the largest emitters. Then you tax the fuck out of SUVs and useless large vehicles. Only then you can go after the combustion engine, which is at its peak efficiency and lowest pollution.
How do you impose taxes on other countries without taking them over first? Sounds like more trouble than it’s worth. It’s like getting Mexico to pay for a wall the USA is building.
China and India have way over a billion people each and still pollute less than the USA on a per capita basis. If you want them to take responsibility for moral reasons, your moral high ground isn’t very high.
China and India have way over a billion people each and still pollute less than the USA on a per capita basis. If you want them to take responsibility for moral reasons, your moral high ground isn’t very high.
Yeah like ostracizing trade towards a foreign country has never been done.
Yes, but that generally involves cutting off your own nose to spite your hand. I assume parent wanted to punish these countries without also punishing Americans.
Not in California lol
Only if you do this weird unrealistic math. Usually you need to install some infrastructure or deal with overnight slow charging. Thats if you even have a spot at home for this. Factor in your time hunting for a charger or waiting around for the car, depending on how you value your time, and maybe filling up the gas car for $40 in 3 minutes really is cheaper when you’ve accounted for all the inconvenience you might be saddled with.
Also in most countries of this world, charging an EV effectively means charging with a majority of energy derived from burning gasoline (or equivalents).
In most countries where EV adoption is progressing you can count on a turnover of electric power generation from fossil to non-fossil sources. As that happens, EVs become greener and greener. Gas cars are still going to be gas cars.
You, ah, might want to check your numbers.
Fully 70 countries in the world generate more than 50% of their energy from renewables [1], and it's climbing rapidly.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_renewable...
Fully 70 countries in the world generate more than 50% of their energy from renewables [1], and it's climbing rapidly.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_renewable...
Electricity produced at scale using fossil fuels is more cleaner than ICE cars. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-15/electric-...
If you burn gasoline in an ICE car only about 30% of the energy of that gasoline ends up actually going to propelling your vehicle. The rest is mostly lost as waste heat.
Burn it in a combined cycle power plant to convert it to electricity and there are still substantial loses to waste heat but much less than when burning it an ICE car. There will be some smaller losses in the power grid and charging infrastructure to get that electricity into your battery, and some small losses in your EV's electric powertrain, but in the end around 40% of the energy of the fuel ends up going toward propelling your vehicle.
Burn it in a combined cycle power plant to convert it to electricity and there are still substantial loses to waste heat but much less than when burning it an ICE car. There will be some smaller losses in the power grid and charging infrastructure to get that electricity into your battery, and some small losses in your EV's electric powertrain, but in the end around 40% of the energy of the fuel ends up going toward propelling your vehicle.
The article starts with the phrase “The price of home charging”
I got a 40A outlet installed in my garage for $400 after a state rebate for EV chargers at home. In the past 2 years I've used a non-home charger 3 times, only on long distances road trips. I charge the car maybe twice a week, and when I do it takes literally 5 seconds as in walking by to plug it in. I would say an EV is far more cost and time effective for my circumstances.
(Disclaimer: The following applies to western Europe)
> Factor in your time hunting for a charger
Not really an issue, there is a large variety of apps to navigate you to a charger and check availiability beforehand.
> waiting around for the car
In my experience when on the highway the time you need for a break (toilet, eating, relaxing) is equal or less than the time the car needs to charge. If you are shopping, your car will be done charging before you finish.
> Usually you need to install some infrastructure or deal with overnight slow charging.
If you are just using the car in the city for short trips you only need to change every 1-2 weeks. In that case you can just go to a quick charge station which many gas stations are installing now in paralell to their pumps.
The problem I see right now: While consumer prices are 0.3€/kWh at home, quick chargers demand 0.65€/kWh, which is insane.
> Factor in your time hunting for a charger
Not really an issue, there is a large variety of apps to navigate you to a charger and check availiability beforehand.
> waiting around for the car
In my experience when on the highway the time you need for a break (toilet, eating, relaxing) is equal or less than the time the car needs to charge. If you are shopping, your car will be done charging before you finish.
> Usually you need to install some infrastructure or deal with overnight slow charging.
If you are just using the car in the city for short trips you only need to change every 1-2 weeks. In that case you can just go to a quick charge station which many gas stations are installing now in paralell to their pumps.
The problem I see right now: While consumer prices are 0.3€/kWh at home, quick chargers demand 0.65€/kWh, which is insane.
I charged my Tesla on US 110 volts for several years just plugging into an outlet. Overnight, it got me plenty of charge for a normal day of driving. You're building a case based on faulty assumptions.
What's unrealistic about this math? Just because the math involves new parameters (EG amortized cost of charging infrastructure & cost of electricity) doesn't mean it's fabricated.
Even level 1 charging (as you call it "overnight slow charging") gives you ~5 miles per hour and only requires a cheap charger of ~200 bucks. Charge it from 8PM to 6AM and you get 50 miles of range. If you have a <50 mile commute, you can charge from 8PM to 6AM, and your work commute is taken care of. Charge a little longer on weekends and you can budget further.
This situation might not work for everyone! Street parking of course makes this nearly impossible. But A LOT of Americans have a <50 mile commute, and a garage with an outlet. For these people, they're saving money every day, and never have to use a gas station ever again. In this situation you'll pay off that initial $200 in ~8 months. But even disregarding financial savings, many may simply prefer the tradeoff of not having to go to gas stations in exchange for plugging in when they return home.
Then, if you need to go on a >200 mile trip, you have to use a public charger, and the math is less favorable as those will cost more and you'll have to hang out for a bit. But once again, you need to consider how often this is an occurance for you. For some people, it's weekly (or daily!). For some it's once a month or once a year. I agree that we're not at the place where from cost savings alone, it is maximally effective for everyone, but I don't think it's unrealistic for a very large portion of Americans.
Even level 1 charging (as you call it "overnight slow charging") gives you ~5 miles per hour and only requires a cheap charger of ~200 bucks. Charge it from 8PM to 6AM and you get 50 miles of range. If you have a <50 mile commute, you can charge from 8PM to 6AM, and your work commute is taken care of. Charge a little longer on weekends and you can budget further.
This situation might not work for everyone! Street parking of course makes this nearly impossible. But A LOT of Americans have a <50 mile commute, and a garage with an outlet. For these people, they're saving money every day, and never have to use a gas station ever again. In this situation you'll pay off that initial $200 in ~8 months. But even disregarding financial savings, many may simply prefer the tradeoff of not having to go to gas stations in exchange for plugging in when they return home.
Then, if you need to go on a >200 mile trip, you have to use a public charger, and the math is less favorable as those will cost more and you'll have to hang out for a bit. But once again, you need to consider how often this is an occurance for you. For some people, it's weekly (or daily!). For some it's once a month or once a year. I agree that we're not at the place where from cost savings alone, it is maximally effective for everyone, but I don't think it's unrealistic for a very large portion of Americans.
Not only is the math not unrealistic, but I'd argue EVs have a fairy obvious structural advantage that makes their convenience advantage clear without having to do math at all.
A large percentage of personal vehicles mostly take short distance trips between which they spend the vast majority of their life parked at one of a handful of consistent locations. Even with slow charging, EVs have ample opportunity to "refuel" with no additional time investment. As for monetary cost, the electricity to refuel an EV can be generated by a huge number of sources to leverage the cheapest (or greenest if that's what you want to optimize for) ones and be centralized to take advantage of economies of scale. Even if the electricity is fossil fuel generated, a power plant can be far more efficient at turning that fossil fuel into energy than your car engine can.
This is different than saying this charging reality is true for everyone right this second, but they key point is that it's possible for EVs while it is fundamentally impossible for traditional internal combustion vehicles. Your ICE car is never going to be able to be refueled at home overnight or at work during the day. It will never be able to take advantage of solar or wind or nuclear energy. Refueling an ICE car might be fairly convenient now, but this is as good as it gets, it's never going to get any better. My current situation doesn't allow me to charge an EV at work or home, so it would be marginally less convenient for me. But that's pretty fixable in the grand scheme of things, while I'm never going to be able to refuel my ICE car while I sleep.
Anyone doing the comparison between ICE and EV now and not accounting for all the extra upside room to grow EVs still have (and ICE does not) is definitely missing the forest for the trees.
A large percentage of personal vehicles mostly take short distance trips between which they spend the vast majority of their life parked at one of a handful of consistent locations. Even with slow charging, EVs have ample opportunity to "refuel" with no additional time investment. As for monetary cost, the electricity to refuel an EV can be generated by a huge number of sources to leverage the cheapest (or greenest if that's what you want to optimize for) ones and be centralized to take advantage of economies of scale. Even if the electricity is fossil fuel generated, a power plant can be far more efficient at turning that fossil fuel into energy than your car engine can.
This is different than saying this charging reality is true for everyone right this second, but they key point is that it's possible for EVs while it is fundamentally impossible for traditional internal combustion vehicles. Your ICE car is never going to be able to be refueled at home overnight or at work during the day. It will never be able to take advantage of solar or wind or nuclear energy. Refueling an ICE car might be fairly convenient now, but this is as good as it gets, it's never going to get any better. My current situation doesn't allow me to charge an EV at work or home, so it would be marginally less convenient for me. But that's pretty fixable in the grand scheme of things, while I'm never going to be able to refuel my ICE car while I sleep.
Anyone doing the comparison between ICE and EV now and not accounting for all the extra upside room to grow EVs still have (and ICE does not) is definitely missing the forest for the trees.
BS article, lots of frameing; You have to look at the full picture, doesnt make sense to just zoom in on one part of the equation. E.g. doesn't take into account the energy that you have to invest to charge your car (as the charge gets higher, the amount of energy needed to keep filling rises as well), Solar panels are NOT free, EVs need to charge more and it would be fair to include extra miles that are made to find a charger that actually works (It is said only 25% works) let alone higher costs due to higher failure rates (see the German TUV reliability index).
I will happily keep driving my diesel. The people I know will only keep driving their EV until people have to start paying roadtax for them.
I will happily keep driving my diesel. The people I know will only keep driving their EV until people have to start paying roadtax for them.
> It is said only 25% works
It is said wrong then. I drive my EV all ov er Europe and most chargers work most of the time. In three years of driving I encountered three broken stations that were shown as functional in the app.
It is said wrong then. I drive my EV all ov er Europe and most chargers work most of the time. In three years of driving I encountered three broken stations that were shown as functional in the app.
This article was about the US, not Europe. Here is one source; https://www.governing.com/climate/why-do-so-many-ev-chargers...
See for example https://www.carbonbrief.org/factcheck-how-electric-vehicles-... for a good debunking of many common myths (good showing here).
Yes, one should not accept the all-rosy picture of EVs being all-clean and ideal. But my EV a) is 4-5 times more efficient overall in converting energy into motion than a car that burns gasoline, b) has significantly fewer parts, c) of the energy I use, at least a portion comes from non-CO2-emitting sources (nuclear, solar, wind), d) when I brake or go downhill in the mountains, I recover some of the energy, while purely gasoline-powered cars recover none, and finally d) we seriously need to stop burning dinosaurs, or we'll cook ourselves.
BTW, as a datapoint from someone who has done some calculations in real-world scenarios: when charging at home (EU), my ongoing cost-per-km is roughly half that of a gasoline-powered car.