Poll: Do you have, or plan to get, an electric car?

[Bilsch]

I have read the heavy metal load from making solar panels is a big problem too.

Only thin film solar cells have any heavy metals and these are not what you find in residential rooftop solar. Silicon solar cells, the most used one, do not contain any toxics and even if they did it would be locked up in the silicon, essentially glass, something that will never break down.

 

[kestrelbrewing]

We have a BMW i3 with the "range extender". My wife uses it to commute the 40 miles round trip for work. It has a pure battery range of about 75 miles and then it has a 2 gallon gas tank that powers a small generator. Since we got a solar system, and my wife is working form home because her office is still all remote, I have found myself driving her car more often since it is "free". I actually enjoy driving the little thing because it has amazing pickup. Nothing like sitting at a red light and having some juvenile pull up in his tricked out civic and start revving his engine and then flat out smoking him off the line in something that looks like a toy.

Our other (my) vehicle is an FJ cruiser which is good for hauling stuff and camping trips. For us, that's a good balance.

 

[Bilsch]

If folks want to get back on topic . . . .

The limiting factor for us in purchasing an electric car is that we live in a multi-unit building in Chicago and our parking area has no charging. I'm not aware of any quick charging public options.

There are at least 5 Tesla superchargers in the Chicago area and a bunch more destination chargers.

 

[DU99]

They need to uniform the charging plugs and place stations where people can get access to them ,not just in capital city car park..

 

[matt_m]

Electric not for the foreseeable future because of the range issue. It wasn't an option 2 years ago when we bought my wife's Escape but if we were buying a new one today, we'd probably buy the plug-in hybrid which should could charge for "free" at her office about 20 miles away.

If we were doing it again we'd probably also go to only 1 car between my wife and I or maybe an older, inexpensive car for me.

 

[kestrelbrewing]

They need to uniform the charging plugs and place stations where people can get access to them ,not just in capital city car park..

Almost all EV manufacturers use the SAE J1772 with the exception of Mitsubishi and Nissan. The SAE J1772 is what every charging station I've ever used has. It accommodates two different types of connections: one for slow speed charging and one for high speed charging. It's very, very simple.

 

[AzOr]

The ICE vs EV conversation reminds me of the propane vs electric brewing argument.
Oddly enough I’m a propane brewer but hopefully will cross the imaginary line and be a EV user. I’m still hanging on to my propane brewing setup though.

 

[RePete]

Almost all EV manufacturers use the SAE J1772 with the exception of Mitsubishi and Nissan. The SAE J1772 is what every charging station I've ever used has. It accommodates two different types of connections: one for slow speed charging and one for high speed charging. It's very, very simple.

You are talking about level 2 Chargers. Which, on a car like my Volt, might put on 8 miles of range in an hour. It's not really that fast. When I charge overnight on 110V, it takes maybe 12 hours to get 60 miles of range. I think that Tesla's can use them, but need an adapter.

For fast charging you either need a Tesla, or something like a Bolt. Not all Bolts come with the DC Fast Charger upgrade. But it's an option if you want to pay for it.

A friend of mine bought a Bolt in Chicago last year. It was cold out, so he ran the heater which ran down the battery. Much to his chagrin, he found out that there were no DC Fast Chargers between Chicago and Indianapolis. Even at Chevy dealers. There were plenty of level 2 Chargers. He called in a panic. What do I do? I to him to get a hotel , grab a beer, and let it charge overnight. Which is what he did.

 

[mongoose33]

Here are a few items from a guy who just retired from teaching in the Sustainability/Renewable Energy area.

1. Electric isn't truly "green" unless two things happen: first, the power that charges it comes from a green source, not coal fired, not nat gas, and second, that the power and resources used to make the car are green (same issue).

2. It takes energy to make an energy-efficient vehicle. There's a term for it, called "embodied energy." If you replace an ICE car with an electric, you may be greener, but only after you make up for all the energy it took to make the vehicle.

3. The problem of how long until charge is called "Range Anxiety." It's much better. With ranges exceeding 300 miles today, most electric cars pass the "everyday use" test. What they aren't as good for is extended trips.

4. Many have, and others will, have a multiple-vehicle family with an electric vehicle for everyday things, and an ICE car for longer trips. About the longest trip I make is maybe 300 miles round-trip, which is in the range of many electric cars.

5. As ranges of EVs have increased, "range anxiety" is being supplanted by "charge anxiety." If one doesn't have a convenient access to charging while on the road, and charging that is relatively fast, then it's also an issue.

And here's the biggest issue of all, IMO:

As a class assignment, I had my students figure out the gasoline-price break-even point, i.e., how high would gas prices have to rise for the monthly cost to break even.

You have to make some assumptions to do this. I told them 12000 miles annually, the price of the EV (Chevy Bolt at the time) was about $35k, the price of a comparable ICE car similar to a Ford Focus was $20,000. We assumed a 6-year loan with something like $3k down on each.

I figured something like an average of 30mpg on the Focus (I own one, that's why I used it), and factored in the electricity charging costs of the EV. I added a couple oil changes a year for the Focus. My insurance agent insisted the annual costs to insure both where the same, but I don't really believe that. A totaled $35k car should cost more to insure than a $20k car, but we used equal insurance anyway.

Guess how high gas prices would have to rise for the montly cost to break even? You will not believe it.

$9.32 per gallon.

Yeah. About impossible to believe, but do the math. People think they're saving a ton of money with these things, but they never are. There are also end-of-life costs such as whether the battery needs replacement after 7 years, and so on.

Now, you cannot do these kinds of problems without making some assumptions; you can fill in your own as you like. But the numbers we used were not outlandish, and making some changes here or there wouldn't change the results all that much.

In the end, would I buy one? Yeah. Maybe. Possibly. If the price comes down.

 

[RePete]

Yeah. About impossible to believe, but do the math. People think they're saving a ton of money with these things, but they never are. There are also end-of-life costs such as whether the battery needs replacement after 7 years, and so on.

There are no free lunches. And if you drive, you're not being green, really. If you want to be green, you really need to walk or ride a bike. But many of us do need to drive to make a living.

As far as costs, I don't know if electric cars are discounted more or what. But I found deals on both of my Volts for around $10k off of sticker price. And then there was the $7500 tax credit. Counting both of those, I paid about the same as you did for your $20k car.

 

[kestrelbrewing]

You are talking about level 2 Chargers. Which, on a car like my Volt, might put on 8 miles of range in an hour. It's not really that fast. When I charge overnight on 110V, it takes maybe 12 hours to get 60 miles of range. I think that Tesla's can use them, but need an adapter.

For fast charging you either need a Tesla, or something like a Bolt. Not all Bolts come with the DC Fast Charger upgrade. But it's an option if you want to pay for it.

A friend of mine bought a Bolt in Chicago last year. It was cold out, so he ran the heater which ran down the battery. Much to his chagrin, he found out that there were no DC Fast Chargers between Chicago and Indianapolis. Even at Chevy dealers. There were plenty of level 2 Chargers. He called in a panic. What do I do? I to him to get a hotel , grab a beer, and let it charge overnight. Which is what he did.

Our i3 also takes overnight to go from 0-65 on 110v. But the charger at the supermarket gets us there in about 20 minutes.

 

[Pappers_]

Huh, this conversation is making me look around now. I was just at the Walgreens near us (Roosevelt and Canal for Chicago-ites) and they have two charging stations in their parking lot.

 

[AzOr]

Here are a few items from a guy who just retired from teaching in the Sustainability/Renewable Energy area.

1. Electric isn't truly "green" unless two things happen: first, the power that charges it comes from a green source, not coal fired, not nat gas, and second, that the power and resources used to make the car are green (same issue).

2. It takes energy to make an energy-efficient vehicle. There's a term for it, called "embodied energy." If you replace an ICE car with an electric, you may be greener, but only after you make up for all the energy it took to make the vehicle.

3. The problem of how long until charge is called "Range Anxiety." It's much better. With ranges exceeding 300 miles today, most electric cars pass the "everyday use" test. What they aren't as good for is extended trips.

4. Many have, and others will, have a multiple-vehicle family with an electric vehicle for everyday things, and an ICE car for longer trips. About the longest trip I make is maybe 300 miles round-trip, which is in the range of many electric cars.

5. As ranges of EVs have increased, "range anxiety" is being supplanted by "charge anxiety." If one doesn't have a convenient access to charging while on the road, and charging that is relatively fast, then it's also an issue.

And here's the biggest issue of all, IMO:

As a class assignment, I had my students figure out the gasoline-price break-even point, i.e., how high would gas prices have to rise for the monthly cost to break even.

You have to make some assumptions to do this. I told them 12000 miles annually, the price of the EV (Chevy Bolt at the time) was about $35k, the price of a comparable ICE car similar to a Ford Focus was $20,000. We assumed a 6-year loan with something like $3k down on each.

I figured something like an average of 30mpg on the Focus (I own one, that's why I used it), and factored in the electricity charging costs of the EV. I added a couple oil changes a year for the Focus. My insurance agent insisted the annual costs to insure both where the same, but I don't really believe that. A totaled $35k car should cost more to insure than a $20k car, but we used equal insurance anyway.

Guess how high gas prices would have to rise for the montly cost to break even? You will not believe it.

$9.32 per gallon.

Yeah. About impossible to believe, but do the math. People think they're saving a ton of money with these things, but they never are. There are also end-of-life costs such as whether the battery needs replacement after 7 years, and so on.

Now, you cannot do these kinds of problems without making some assumptions; you can fill in your own as you like. But the numbers we used were not outlandish, and making some changes here or there wouldn't change the results all that much.

In the end, would I buy one? Yeah. Maybe. Possibly. If the price comes down.

Great write up Mongoose33, very informative. I also appreciate you pointing out the assumptions.

First this thread paralleled the propane vs electric brewer, now it's mirroring the "is it cheaper to homebrew" argument.

As far as assumptions, the 35k ev vs 20k car; I'd be willing to bet that someone in the position to buy a 50k Tesla 3 would probably not settle for a 25k Camry as a daily drive.

The other assumption is that I'm sure there are those out there that just enjoy newer technology, whether it pencils out or not. As said before, I own 2 ICE cars, but would love to go ev in a few years as technology improves and prices decrease. I'll probably still keep my 4x4 tow vehicle but see absolutely no reason to commute with that gas hog.
Others may enjoy harvesting their own energy and not being reliant on what happens geopolitically in Saudi Arabia or wherever. Others may enjoy the quietness or the quickness of instant torque.

There are vehicles out there that cost a lot of money and are horribly reliable and expensive to fix and don't hold their resale value. Yet people still buy them over boring Corollas or Camrys because of ride quality or status (I'm looking at you German cars).

 

[AzOr]

This isn't comparable but related. Slowly I've been replacing my lawn equipment over to electric and the difference is night and day. Although I haven't made the plunge and bought an electric lawnmower (I have a 5 year old Honda that refuses to die), I can weed wack and blow off yard debris with rechargeable machines early in morning or in evening without annoying neighbors.

 

[mongoose33]

There are no free lunches. And if you drive, you're not being green, really. If you want to be green, you really need to walk or ride a bike. But many of us do need to drive to make a living.

As far as costs, I don't know if electric cars are discounted more or what. But I found deals on both of my Volts for around $10k off of sticker price. And then there was the $7500 tax credit. Counting both of those, I paid about the same as you did for your $20k car.

I did the same calcs years ago when the Volt first came out. Even after the $7500 discount was used--and how you factor that in is an issue--back then the insurance on the Volt was a lot higher. The calcs at that time showed gas would have to rise to $13/gallon. I'm not kidding. It's why nobody was buying Volts unless they wanted to make a statement.

It's also why you got a discount on yours and why GM stopped making them. It wasn't a bad deal to do what you did, not at all. I always said I'd buy a Volt if the price was comparable. If I'd have found one at the same price as my Focus, I'd have been all over it.

[BTW, a little interesting history behind the Volt: GM's engineers and others researched driving habits, found that something like 70 percent of all drivers didn't drive 40 miles in a day. So they made a hybrid electric vehicle that would go 40 miles on battery; after that distance, an ICE would produce electricity to recharge the battery and run the car. I know you know this, BTW. The interesting thing for me was that A) they produced a car that matched the driving habits of the majority of drivers, and B) eliminated range anxiety. It still is one of the smartest things I've ever seen an automaker do. If only they could have gotten the price down.....]

The tax rebate was interesting. It offset taxes, wasn't a "rebate," so if you didn't pay $7500 or more in taxed, you didn't get the whole thing. Then there was the problem of accounting for that in terms of the loan. Not easy to solve, and depends on the assumptions.

 

[mongoose33]

Great write up Mongoose33, very informative. I also appreciate you pointing out the assumptions.

First this thread paralleled the propane vs electric brewer, now it's mirroring the "is it cheaper to homebrew" argument.

As far as assumptions, the 35k ev vs 20k car; I'd be willing to bet that someone in the position to buy a 50k Tesla 3 would probably not settle for a 25k Camry as a daily drive.

The other assumption is that I'm sure there are those out there that just enjoy newer technology, whether it pencils out or not. As said before, I own 2 ICE cars, but would love to go ev in a few years as technology improves and prices decrease. I'll probably still keep my 4x4 tow vehicle but see absolutely no reason to commute with that gas hog.
Others may enjoy harvesting their own energy and not being reliant on what happens geopolitically in Saudi Arabia or wherever. Others may enjoy the quietness or the quickness of instant torque.

There are vehicles out there that cost a lot of money and are horribly reliable and expensive to fix and don't hold their resale value. Yet people still buy them over boring Corollas or Camrys because of ride quality or status (I'm looking at you German cars).

Oh, if it sounded like I was being judgmental, I wasn't. People should make their choices. Sometimes they don't make the best ones. I've been there.

But sometimes--in fact almost always--their choices reflect their values. If you value appearing Green, then buy a green car. It doesn't hurt me. If high horsepower is your thing, then buy such a car (though performance-wise, an electric car seems to outclass almost everything).

You can really go down a rabbit hole with this. I see people buying $50,000 trucks and can't figure out why. I used to have one, realized I almost never needed its "truckiness," sold it and reduced my montly transportation costs by a ton. My BIL has a truck, if I need one I borrow his. And Menards rents pickups cheap.

Based on MY values, there's not enough value in a truck for me to pay $300/mo more than what I'd pay for a simple vehicle. But if someone else wants to do that, fine. As long as they aren't going to ask me to subsidize their life in some other way so they can spend $300/mo on a truck they never need or use, I'm fine with it.

Heck, how many think I'm stupid for taking flying lessons? How silly is that? But I want to, it's my money, and I like challenges like that. Others might get some sort of psychic or other value from owning an expensive truck.

************

I used to own a Chevy S10 4x4 extended cab. I sure miss that truck.

************

You hit on something else--what people can afford and why. Status symbols and all that. My standards today are different than when I was fresh out of school. Back then, I mowed my own lawn. Today, I pay a neighbor kid to do it. Well, I have an excuse--a bad back that hurts when I mow--but I *could* do it. I choose not to, spending my money that way. Others mow their own lawn and devote the money they save to something else.

 

[AzOr]

I did the same calcs years ago when the Volt first came out. Even after the $7500 discount was used--and how you factor that in is an issue--back then the insurance on the Volt was a lot higher. The calcs at that time showed gas would have to rise to $13/gallon. I'm not kidding. It's why nobody was buying Volts unless they wanted to make a statement.

It's also why you got a discount on yours and why GM stopped making them. It wasn't a bad deal to do what you did, not at all. I always said I'd buy a Volt if the price was comparable. If I'd have found one at the same price as my Focus, I'd have been all over it.

[BTW, a little interesting history behind the Volt: GM's engineers and others researched driving habits, found that something like 70 percent of all drivers didn't drive 40 miles in a day. So they made a hybrid electric vehicle that would go 40 miles on battery; after that distance, an ICE would produce electricity to recharge the battery and run the car. I know you know this, BTW. The interesting thing for me was that A) they produced a car that matched the driving habits of the majority of drivers, and B) eliminated range anxiety. It still is one of the smartest things I've ever seen an automaker do. If only they could have gotten the price down.....]

The tax rebate was interesting. It offset taxes, wasn't a "rebate," so if you didn't pay $7500 or more in taxed, you didn't get the whole thing. Then there was the problem of accounting for that in terms of the loan. Not easy to solve, and depends on the assumptions.

If the Volt was slightly bigger and could accommodate kids seats and accessories, there would be one in my driveway now.
I have a coworker who was commuting in his F150. Not sure how many miles his commute was but he purchased a used Volt. He absolutely loves it. He was spending 300-400$ monthly on gas. Which is approximately his payment on the Volt. He still tows w the truck but him and his wife love the Volt and use it for road trips etc.

He let me drive it around the office when he first bought it. Man that thing had some torque to it. I don't think it gets even close to the power of a Tesla, but still a blast to drive.

 

[mongoose33]

I have to add this: I switched to electric brewing, oh, a year or two ago. I had a 60-amp main-panel breaker feed a sub panel in my garage.

While the near-term reason for doing this was to provide a 30-amp 240-v power source for electric brewing, there was a secondary reason:

Charging an electric car.

I'm nowhere near buying one, and only when it makes financial sense will I do this, but one of the hidden costs--or maybe not so hidden--of owning an electric car is providing for charging facilities.

If and when.....I have power to the garage to accommodate a charging station.

 

[Bilsch]

Here are a few items from a guy who just retired from teaching in the Sustainability/Renewable Energy area.

1. Electric isn't truly "green" unless two things happen: first, the power that charges it comes from a green source, not coal fired, not nat gas, and second, that the power and resources used to make the car are green (same issue).
2. It takes energy to make an energy-efficient vehicle. There's a term for it, called "embodied energy." If you replace an ICE car with an electric, you may be greener, but only after you make up for all the energy it took to make the vehicle.
3. The problem of how long until charge is called "Range Anxiety." It's much better. With ranges exceeding 300 miles today, most electric cars pass the "everyday use" test. What they aren't as good for is extended trips.
4. Many have, and others will, have a multiple-vehicle family with an electric vehicle for everyday things, and an ICE car for longer trips. About the longest trip I make is maybe 300 miles round-trip, which is in the range of many electric cars.
5. As ranges of EVs have increased, "range anxiety" is being supplanted by "charge anxiety." If one doesn't have a convenient access to charging while on the road, and charging that is relatively fast, then it's also an issue.
And here's the biggest issue of all, IMO:
As a class assignment, I had my students figure out the gasoline-price break-even point, i.e., how high would gas prices have to rise for the monthly cost to break even.
You have to make some assumptions to do this. I told them 12000 miles annually, the price of the EV (Chevy Bolt at the time) was about $35k, the price of a comparable ICE car similar to a Ford Focus was $20,000. We assumed a 6-year loan with something like $3k down on each.
I figured something like an average of 30mpg on the Focus (I own one, that's why I used it), and factored in the electricity charging costs of the EV. I added a couple oil changes a year for the Focus. My insurance agent insisted the annual costs to insure both where the same, but I don't really believe that. A totaled $35k car should cost more to insure than a $20k car, but we used equal insurance anyway.
Guess how high gas prices would have to rise for the montly cost to break even? You will not believe it.
$9.32 per gallon.
Yeah. About impossible to believe, but do the math. People think they're saving a ton of money with these things, but they never are. There are also end-of-life costs such as whether the battery needs replacement after 7 years, and so on.
Now, you cannot do these kinds of problems without making some assumptions; you can fill in your own as you like. But the numbers we used were not outlandish, and making some changes here or there wouldn't change the results all that much.
In the end, would I buy one? Yeah. Maybe. Possibly. If the price comes down.

I must respectfully disagree with your assumptions and findings.

1) The grid isn't either all green or all fossil fuel but instead a mix. Currently the US is powered by:
62.7% fossil fuels, 19.7% nuclear and 17.5% renewable energy. Even if an EV only achieved comparable mileage to an ICE, right out of the gate you would be producing 37.2% less carbon than a gas or diesel vehicle. Now add the fact that EV's are, at the minimum, 2 times more efficient at turning an equivalent amount of mined energy into road miles you can quickly see that electric cars are much more environmentally friendly then combustion engine powered vehicles, even plugged into the dirtiest of grids.

2) You are using old data to make your point here as these days the amount of energy to make an ICE car is right about on par with EV vehicles. What you fail to factor in is the extra amount of carbon and other noxious gasses that ICE will spew out during it's lifetime that the EV will not which has a huge cost to society. Also consider that with electric the power generation is done out side of cities and is not coming from the tailpipe ahead of you on the road. Did anyone happen to catch the pictures taken recently of major metropolitan areas during the last covid shutdown where you could see the skyline in blue and not orange smog haze? Again even if EV's were only equally efficient to ICE cars, what value is not having to suck on that tail pipe in front of you?

3) I have zero range anxiety. I can go 270 miles in a charge and fill up at 150kw+ and be on my way in about the time it takes to get a coffee and use the restroom. The newer models have much bigger batteries and even faster charging (250kw) making this whole range/charge anxiety a thing of the past.

4) I think your assumptions were based on old technology and you also forgot to factor in maintenance which is a huge chunk of the cost of owning an ICE car. The web is littered with sites comparing ICE costs to EV. Here is is a comprehensive study out of Canada comparing the total costs of ICE and EV for your students to check their work against. By the way the EV's compared in this study are older and not terribly efficient ones either.

https://www.2degreesinstitute.org/r...ectric_and_gas_powered_vehicles_in_canada.pdf
The average 10 year savings from EV ownership is $26,900 Canadian. Not an insignificant amount thats for sure. Add to that the long term costs of damaging the environment, EV's are a no brainer.

And lastly, owning and EV gives you a choice in where your power comes from. Adding solar is the absolute cheapest way to drive with the huge benefit of being positive you are not sending a penny directly or indirectly to the Middle east, Russia, Venezuela, Nigeria, Angola or any number of places where your petrodollar might find it's way back to hurt you.

 

[RePete]

I have to add this: I switched to electric brewing, oh, a year or two ago. I had a 60-amp main-panel breaker feed a sub panel in my garage.

While the near-term reason for doing this was to provide a 30-amp 240-v power source for electric brewing, there was a secondary reason:

Charging an electric car.

I'm nowhere near buying one, and only when it makes financial sense will I do this, but one of the hidden costs--or maybe not so hidden--of owning an electric car is providing for charging facilities.

If and when.....I have power to the garage to accommodate a charging station.

See, I'm looking at this in the opposite direction. I'm looking to get 220V run to my garage so I can charge the car faster. With the added bonus of switching to a 220V brewing system.
But really, charging on 110V works fine. As long as you're not in a hurry. I usually get home by 6pm or so, plug it in, and have 60 miles of range by 7am the next morning.

The economics of this have changed, for me at least, since the pandemic hit. I'm not doing as much work, so I'm driving less. I'm all electric now, for the most part. The tax credit was a big factor, and that has gone away. So, not sure I would buy one now. But I have it, and it's a great car.

As far as the Volt goes, I feel lucky to have one. But I feel like Chevy really didn't want to sell them. I never saw a single ad on TV. I mean, you wouldn't even have known they made them unless you looked. Dealers didn't push them, because they don't need much maintenance, so they can't make money on service. It's just not a profit center. When I bought my last Volt, it wasn't even charged. They just put gas in it.

Car manufacturers make most of their profits on things like trucks. So that's why you see a dozen truck commercials during halftime of football games

 

[mongoose33]

I must respectfully disagree with your assumptions and findings.

1) The grid isn't either all green or all fossil fuel but instead a mix. Currently the US is powered by:
62.7% fossil fuels, 19.7% nuclear and 17.5% renewable energy. Even if an EV only achieved comparable mileage to an ICE, right out of the gate you would be producing 37.2% less carbon than a gas or diesel vehicle. Now add the fact that EV's are, at the minimum, 2 times more efficient at turning an equivalent amount of mined energy into road miles you can quickly see that electric cars are much more environmentally friendly then combustion engine powered vehicles, even plugged into the dirtiest of grids.

Well, you make the argument as one of degrees. I'm pointing out that assumptions people make are not usually correct. And yes, an electron doesn't know how it was generated, but if your electricity is 30 percent produced by coal, then you're 30 percent coal-dirty.

The point is that buying an electric car doesn't magically make you "green." You're more greenish, but the virtue signaling by some people makes you think they believe they're saving the world. No.

2) You are using old data to make your point here as these days the amount of energy to make an ICE car is right about on par with EV vehicles. What you fail to factor in is the extra amount of carbon and other noxious gasses that ICE will spew out during it's lifetime that the EV will not which has a huge cost to society. Also consider that with electric the power generation is done out side of cities and is not coming from the tailpipe ahead of you on the road. Did anyone happen to catch the pictures taken recently of major metropolitan areas during the last covid shutdown where you could see the skyline in blue and not orange smog haze? Again even if EV's were only equally efficient to ICE cars, what value is not having to suck on that tail pipe in front of you?

Well, I don't think it's old data. If you take a car that is perfectly fine and replace it with an electric vehicle, you're using energy to do it.

I'm not saying there aren't pollution advantages, but if your electricity is all produced from coal, all you're doing is changing the point source. It might make city air cleaner, but that dirt is going into the atmosphere somewhere.

3) I have zero range anxiety. I can go 270 miles in a charge and fill up at 150kw+ and be on my way in about the time it takes to get a coffee and use the restroom. The newer models have much bigger batteries and even faster charging (250kw) making this whole range/charge anxiety a thing of the past.

That's good. Not all people feel that way. As I noted above, 300 miles range will do what most people need. But not all such cars have that range. At some point these issues will fade, but they remain a problem in many people's minds. For me, a 300-mile range would work just fine. The two trips that wouldn't come under that range limit could be done with an ICE car, or I could wait around for it to partially recharge.

4) I think your assumptions were based on old technology and you also forgot to factor in maintenance which is a huge chunk of the cost of owning an ICE car. The web is littered with sites comparing ICE costs to EV. Here is is a comprehensive study out of Canada comparing the total costs of ICE and EV for your students to check their work against. By the way the EV's compared in this study are older and not terribly efficient ones either.

New cars don't have a lot of maintenance. I went 5 years before any significant repairs on my 2014 Focus. Brakes and tires, sure, but the only major repair was covered under warranty. It is true that older cars have more repairs, but most older cars don't have large monthly payments.

And it's not like electric cars don't have any maintenance.

https://www.2degreesinstitute.org/r...ectric_and_gas_powered_vehicles_in_canada.pdf
The average 10 year savings from EV ownership is $26,900 Canadian. Not an insignificant amount thats for sure. Add to that the long term costs of damaging the environment, EV's are a no brainer.

There is potentially a long-term advantage, but it depends on the assumptions you wish to make to make that point. Once you get past the amortization of the loan, fuel costs are very low for an EV, but when gasoline prices are low, not so much. You also have to factor in how much MORE you pay in the early years of an EV.

I'm not anti-EV--but what I am is a realist. It's not a panacea. There are energy and pollution costs in making them. There are pollution costs in charging them. And they're generally more expensive, especially early in the life cycle. That in itself is the difference between people buying them and not.

When the cost approximates an ICE, I'll likely get one--though right now I probably wouldn't. My Focus is paid off, works great, gets great mileage, and serves my needs.

And lastly, owning and EV gives you a choice in where your power comes from. Adding solar is the absolute cheapest way to drive with the huge benefit of being positive you are not sending a penny directly or indirectly to the Middle east, Russia, Venezuela, Nigeria, Angola or any number of places where your petrodollar might find it's way back to hurt you.

With respect, electrons don't know where they're from. And while EV enthusiasts tend to focus on the cost of fuel per mile to drive, you have to look at the whole picture, including the up front costs. When you do that, some of the shine comes off EV ownership.

 

[mongoose33]

See, I'm looking at this in the opposite direction. I'm looking to get 220V run to my garage so I can charge the car faster. With the added bonus of switching to a 220V brewing system.
But really, charging on 110V works fine. As long as you're not in a hurry. I usually get home by 6pm or so, plug it in, and have 60 miles of range by 7am the next morning.

So you bought an electric car to justify electric brewing. I love it!

The economics of this have changed, for me at least, since the pandemic hit. I'm not doing as much work, so I'm driving less. I'm all electric now, for the most part. The tax credit was a big factor, and that has gone away. So, not sure I would buy one now. But I have it, and it's a great car.

Not driving as much either. Oddly--this is only tangentially related--apparently vehicle fatalities have stayed steady despite total miles driven having dropped something like 25 percent. Apparently people are driving faster on less-crowded roads....

As far as the Volt goes, I feel lucky to have one. But I feel like Chevy really didn't want to sell them. I never saw a single ad on TV. I mean, you wouldn't even have known they made them unless you looked. Dealers didn't push them, because they don't need much maintenance, so they can't make money on service. It's just not a profit center. When I bought my last Volt, it wasn't even charged. They just put gas in it.

You know, I never really thought about it until now, but I don't really remember any marketing for the Volt. Can't even call it a loss leader. Makes one wonder what the point was.

 

[tellyho]

No long distance driving here. Have a 9 year old Mazda 2 that's barely past 60K. So, prime for electric replacement when it dies. Hell, I'm a bike commuter, so my other car barely moves during the week.

 

[Bilsch]

Well, you make the argument as one of degrees. I'm pointing out that assumptions people make are not usually correct. And yes, an electron doesn't know how it was generated, but if your electricity is 30 percent produced by coal, then you're 30 percent coal-dirty. The point is that buying an electric car doesn't magically make you "green." You're more greenish, but the virtue signaling by some people makes you think they believe they're saving the world. No.

I guess I don't understand your logic. Do you believe that burning 100% oil is better than 30 % coal? Maybe you missed the part about EV's being twice as efficient as well. And that point source, the power generation station, has equipment which is much better at extracting the energy from the fuel it burns then your gas car is. It also has much lower emissions per fuel unit consumed because of higher temperature combustion, heat recovery and emissions scrubbing. Don't get me wrong it is by no means clean but even the electricity from 100% coal going to an EV produces less emissions then a gas car. It's proven science. Not greenish, greener! I don't think I am saving the world, it's simply about reducing my footprint and saving money in the process. How praytell could anyone think that was bad?

Most problems are solved in steps and this one is no different.

New cars don't have a lot of maintenance. I went 5 years before any significant repairs on my 2014 Focus. Brakes and tires, sure, but the only major repair was covered under warranty. It is true that older cars have more repairs, but most older cars don't have large monthly payments.
And it's not like electric cars don't have any maintenance.

You are speaking in absolutes. ICE cars have 2000+ moving parts, EV's around 20. It's just a simpler machine that takes less service and saves money. No matter how you view it, electric cars are a lot cheaper to run.

There is potentially a long-term advantage, but it depends on the assumptions you wish to make to make that point. Once you get past the amortization of the loan, fuel costs are very low for an EV, but when gasoline prices are low, not so much.

My EV is not small but still gets 120 MPGe. Have you seen any gas for sale at 50 cents a gallon recently?

You also have to factor in how much MORE you pay in the early years of an EV.

Did you even take a minute to look at that study I posted, or any data on the actual costs of EV vs ICE? On average for the first 3 years an EV will cost more simply because of their higher purchase price. Then you reach the inflection point, after which after it's all savings, a lot of savings. I tend to think out past 3 years when buying a car and that is a lot of cash that stays in my pocket for the lifetime of a vehicle.

Here is another comparison study for you on the cost of ownership in case you didn't like that last one.

https://cleantechnica.com/2019/09/2...series-bmw-4-series-5-year-cost-of-ownership/
"the 5 year cost of ownership of the Model 3 came to $30,002, the 5 year cost of ownership of the BMW 3 Series came to $49,292, and the 5 year cost of ownership of the BMW 4 Series came to $51,940."

 

[day_trippr]

Well, sure, they compared to a Bimmer.
Pretty much any marque under the sun will compare favorably to a BMW wrt cost of long-term ownership...

Cheers!

 

[mongoose33]

I guess I don't understand your logic. Do you believe that burning 100% oil is better than 30 % coal? Maybe you missed the part about EV's being twice as efficient as well. And that point source, the power generation station, has equipment which is much better at extracting the energy from the fuel it burns then your gas car is. It also has much lower emissions per fuel unit consumed because of higher temperature combustion, heat recovery and emissions scrubbing. Don't get me wrong it is by no means clean but even the electricity from 100% coal going to an EV produces less emissions then a gas car. It's proven science. Not greenish, greener! I don't think I am saving the world, it's simply about reducing my footprint and saving money in the process. How praytell could anyone think that was bad?

Most problems are solved in steps and this one is no different.



You are speaking in absolutes. ICE cars have 2000+ moving parts, EV's around 20. It's just a simpler machine that takes less service and saves money. No matter how you view it, electric cars are a lot cheaper to run.



My EV is not small but still gets 120 MPGe. Have you seen any gas for sale at 50 cents a gallon recently?



Did you even take a minute to look at that study I posted, or any data on the actual costs of EV vs ICE? On average for the first 3 years an EV will cost more simply because of their higher purchase price. Then you reach the inflection point, after which after it's all savings, a lot of savings. I tend to think out past 3 years when buying a car and that is a lot of cash that stays in my pocket for the lifetime of a vehicle.

Here is another comparison study for you on the cost of ownership in case you didn't like that last one.

https://cleantechnica.com/2019/09/2...series-bmw-4-series-5-year-cost-of-ownership/
"the 5 year cost of ownership of the Model 3 came to $30,002, the 5 year cost of ownership of the BMW 3 Series came to $49,292, and the 5 year cost of ownership of the BMW 4 Series came to $51,940."

We're going to have to agree to disagree here. Never have I said EVs aren't more "fuel efficient." But the true believers tend to gloss over the issues related to these things, which I stated pretty clearly above, I thought.

For instance, you may think you're being completely green running an EV, but not if your electricity source is fossil fuels. Now, that statement stands on its own; the virtue signalers who think they're being simon pure, well, they're not. Same with the embodied energy needed to make them.

Further, it's generally MUCH more expensive to run an EV, including amortization costs, in the early years of ownership. That's just a fact. As I noted above, people can spend their money as they wish, and if you wish to spend more on transportation, that's your choice. But let's not ignore this crucial element.

Another issue is range anxiety. For you, not an issue. If I had an EV w/ range of 300+ miles, I'd be satisfied. But not everybody is like this. The objective reality gives way to perceptions of reality, and if people perceive there to be range issues, then for practical purposes there ARE range issues. Perception IS reality in instances like this, because people's behavior treats these perceptions as real, and they act on those perceptions.

******

In the end, if EVs were so attractive, people would be buying them in droves. They aren't, which tells me that, in some combination, they're too expensive, haven't enough range, can't be readily or easily charged in many cases. If those things aren't true, then the marketers aren't being effective.

That these aren't issues for you doesn't mean they aren't for others. They are.

I always taught that the moment these issues flipped, people would be on EVs. Those conditions are closer to being flipped, but not there yet. It's why I always told my students to "pencil it out" because assumptions change, elements of the equation change, and nothing is permanent.

The moment that EVs make more sense for me than driving my Focus, I'll be all over them. I'd like a Kia Soul EV. My son has a Soul, it's easy to get in and out of, funky-looking car but very functional given my needs.

The range of the Soul EV has gone from 111 mi (2019) to 234 mi (2020). So it's getting closer to my 300-mile range, but not there yet. Meanwhile, I'm driving a paid-off Focus that gets 40+ on the highway. I'd have to trade that for a BIG car payment. No thanks.

Your conclusions may be different.

 

[mattdee1]

In the end, if EVs were so attractive, people would be buying them in droves. They aren't, which tells me that, in some combination, they're too expensive, haven't enough range, can't be readily or easily charged in many cases. If those things aren't true, then the marketers aren't being effective. ​

​

This statement seems to be ignoring the psychology. People fear the unknown, especially when large amounts of money are involved. This creates market inertia. I wouldn't be surprised to see sales of e-vehicles rise steadily as more and more of the old guard moves on and the younger generation starts to buy cars.

Hey, I drive a Mustang, so I'm no poster child for green transportation. But I work directly in the industry and can see the amount of investment that is being made into e-vehicles; most people probably wouldn't believe it unless they saw it. I'm not ready to go electric quite yet, but I'm definitely intrigued.

What I find unfortunate about the discourse on this subject is the ever-present Nirvana fallacy - basically saying that if e-vehicles don't completely wipe out emissions then they're failing to deliver on their promise. That's the wrong way of looking at it, IMO. We have to account for gradual improvements over time. That includes in areas such as battery recycling, etc. The IC engine powertrains have a 100-year head start on R&D.

 

[CKuhns]

Interesting debate /\ - As range increases, charge time reduces, cost reduces and gas and diesel become more expensive AND us older folks fall off the earth the market will very likely shift. The value Perceived (It makes me feel good and I want it) or Actual (I saved some $$$ and it meets my needs) either or both must be there before the consumer will purchase anything.

For me at this time driving distances are too far for an electric to be feasible. If battery technology or motor efficiency could double the miles per charge then I'm more likely to be in.

 

[RePete]

Tesla Cybertruck
The Tesla Cybertruck is interesting. The fact that it won't be painted and that the metal will be folded instead of stamped will greatly simplify manufacturing. This article explains about it.

 

[AzOr]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.au...ns-electric-truck-and-suv-arrive-next-summer/
In the above article they say that the Rivian ev truck was initially cost 80k but they are reducing price significantly because of Tesla’s 40k truck.

if the Rivian comes out sub 50k, I’m in.