The Western Standard recently published an insightful article that dissects the true costs associated with electric vehicles (EVs), challenging the prevailing notion of their economic efficiency. Drawing from a detailed analysis by the Texas Public Policy Foundation, the article reveals that the actual cost of EVs, when accounting for various subsidies and incentives, equates to USD$17.33 per gallon, or CAD$6.32 per litre, over the vehicle’s lifetime.
“Despite a common perception that electric vehicles are cheaper to own and operate than their internal combustion counterparts, a Texas think tank says the true cost is the equivalent of USD$17.33 per gallon — or CAD$6.32 per litre — over the life of the car, after factoring in subsidies and incentives.”
The study considers full cycle costs, including those related to charging equipment and both direct and indirect subsidies such as avoided fuel taxes. It presents a comprehensive view, revealing that the economic viability of EVs is significantly bolstered by a multitude of financial benefits and subsidies.
“Setting aside some of the questionable assumptions used in deriving such favorable economics for EVs, no one has attempted to calculate the full financial benefit of the wide array of direct subsidies, regulatory credits, and subsidized infrastructure that contribute to the economic viability of EVs,”
the authors noted.
The article also highlights the substantial losses incurred by manufacturers despite receiving significant subsidies. For instance, it is reported that companies like Ford are incurring losses exceeding $70,000 on each EV sold.
“Despite lavish subsidies on both sides of the border — to manufacturers as well as consumers — the report suggests companies such as Ford are losing more than $70,000 on each EV it currently sells.”
Moreover, the article brings attention to various indirect costs that are often overlooked. These include the necessary upgrades and maintenance of the electrical grid to accommodate an increased number of EVs and the additional road maintenance costs due to the heavier weight of EVs.
“EV owners don’t pay the true cost of upgrading and maintaining the electrical grid to accommodate the increased load from higher numbers of EVs on the road, which amounts to a handout from regular electricity consumers.”
In conclusion, the Western Standard’s article provides a detailed examination of the economic aspects of EV ownership, uncovering hidden costs and subsidies that challenge the perceived cost-effectiveness of EVs. It encourages a more nuanced discussion on the economic implications of EVs, considering a broader range of factors beyond the initial purchase price.
…various subsidies…factoring in subsidies…and subsidies…the wide array of direct subsidies…subsidized infrastructure…significant subsidies….lavish subsidies…
___________________________________________________________________
A list or link to all the subsidies would be great.
Indeed! A list of the subsidies would be informative
Federal and State list would probably be huge
On the other hand, cremation costs are substantially reduced.
It’s built into the self immolation clause in the purchase contract
In some cities, if you are driving an EV, you are allowed to use the High Occupancy Lanes (HOC) even if you are driving by yourself.
I’m not sure how you would price that subsidy. In other cities, EVs are excused from paying tolls.
That’s easy isn’t it – the subsidy is the fine you’d have paid = something like £65 per occasion in London and doubling if not paid inside 2 weeks
Thus a drive to and from work in a Bus Lane equates to £130 per day
You don’t want EVs to get stuck in traffic jams. Imagine that they run out of battery.
Um, when an EV is stuck in a traffic jam, it uses very little juice. You wouldn’t want to be stuck for a few hours with the A/C on, but you wouldn’t want to be stuck for a few hours in an ICEV either. Try making sense. LOL
I was thinking that it would be the value of the time saved. Not just the saved in the HOV lane, but the time needed to pick up and drop off your passenger every day.
Here’s the report.
2023-10-TrueCostofEVs-BennettIsaac.pdf (texaspolicy.com)
Thank you for sharing that link.
On table 1A is shows that the biggest subsidy is the CAFE credits that the automotive industry has to pay to support EV’s. The EV’s get an average 19,700 per EV built. With 7% EV market share that means every ICE vehicle buyer is paying ~$1400 more for the car they purchase. Factor in the EV losses that the three major auto companies subsidize from the ICE vehicle market and you begin to understand why the price of a new car has gone up so much in the last 3 years.
This is reminds me of the way the US health care system, the most expensive in the world, is funded but making healthcare providers accept payments below the cost of care which gets subsidized by Americans on private health care plans without regard to people’s income or ability to pay. In that case is the poor and elderly being subsidized the lower middle and middle income Americans. For EV, the only difference it’s the middle income ICE car buyers are subsidizing the wealthy EV buyers.
From the article we have
Given Tesla has the largest market share, one wonders whether this was factored into their calculation. Its certainly not factored into their graphic.
Musk is on the receiving end of those CAFE fuels standard penalties. The government collects money from the manufacturers of gas guzzling ICE vehicles and transfers them to companies making high mileage, low emissions vehicles. They also factor in an unrealistically high mileage value for electric vehicles so he receives a lot of offset money. In reality, a lot of his profits come from ICE vehicles and he’s very happy to squeeze the competition’s EV ambitions with low prices so he can keep that money flowing.
“gas guzzling”, really??
By whose standards??
I drive a 2018 4wd one ton diesel crew cab truck. Over the lifetime of ownership and at 90,000 miles my average fuel efficiency, by the truck computer, is over 15 MPG. Of that 90,000 miles, about 30,000 has been towing an 11,000 lb. 5th wheel all around the USA. Now since it is a 1 ton, it does now effect the CAFE standard BUT envirowacos would use your phony term “gas guzzling”.
The best 400 mile MPG I have gotten with the truck is 23.2 MPG.
My old 2002 extended cab 4wd gas truck never got that good milage, ever. It also averaged UNDER 17 MPG over its 210,000 miles of my ownership, with almost no towing. It is still going strong now driven by our son.
So what does that term mean? It means whatever the leftist takers want it to mean, and it will continually mean MORE cars and trucks are considered “gas guzzlers” because like all leftist plans, they will continue to squeeze the middle class to get more funding for their cronies.
First day in office,
1st executive order: ANY vehicle company who sells vehicles to the US government MUST clearly define on a new vehicle sticker the costs of EVERY government subsidy from or to any other vehicle manufacturer for that particular vehicle but that the subsidy to EVs shall be as a % of the final sticker price and the cost to ICE vehicles be average across ALL vehicles sold by the “fleet”. So ICE would show the funds transferred to EVs, with the lowest cost vehicles showing the highest % of the sticker price and EV would show the funds received from ICE companies for the most expensive vehicles being the highest dollar amount.
2nd executive order: Any refinery who sells fuel to any federal agency MUST provide ON THE PUMP, a breakdown of all federal, state and local taxes and any funds or subsidies used to support “renewable” fuel sources or all funds and subsidies received to support the production of “renewable” fuels. For example, any B20 biodiesel of any gas with ethanol. Note that when you buy gas without ethanol (which I do for all my small motor equipment like chain saws, 4 wheelers, etc.) in it you pay a premium because of a penalty tax imposed to stop the use of ethanol free gas and force the use of the blends.
3rd executive order: To direct the DOJ to prosecute any corporation, specifically ethanol producers, bio diesel producers and EV producers, who fails to provide complete and correct subsidy dollar amounts to refiners of crude oil, those refiners to be held harmless if their numbers are wrong due to the rent seekers malfeasance. The CEO and Board of directors to be responsible both financially and criminally for failure to meet the above requirement. The shareholders SHALL NOT be forced to directly pay (loss of stock value is a tough, you bought the crap, loss) for corporate malfeasance, executive and management personnel to be personally prosecuted.
These actions would begin the process of education the voting population of the cost to the green crap.
Yea, I know. What’s the song? “Dreamer, silly little dreamer”
Further executive orders for any utility who sells power to the US government to show on their bills the cost of state buy renewable first requirements, the subsidized new interconnects and other infrastructure installed by the utilities for “renewable” power connection and the cost of “standby” power generation for when the wind does not blow and/or it is cloudy.
Education of the true cost of the leftist lunacy for 4 years of a new conservative US government could change the electoral map for years to come.
BTW, the new Speaker of the House has proposed funding military and humanitarian aid to Israel with money Dems appropriated WITHOUT ONE REP VOTE IN THE SENATE for 80,000 new IRS agents, their guns, etc. He is proposing a stand alone bill. I already like this guy way better then the swamp creature, McCarthy.
“Musk is on the receiving end of those CAFE fuels standard penalties.”
The quote directly from the paper says otherwise. Apparently the credits cut out once delivery volumes reach a certain level.
You need to go re-read the paper. Federal and some state credits are gone after a number of sales (it used to be 200,000) but CAFE gives you credits for mileage numbers and penalizes you for vehicles that don’t meet the standard. ICEV makers pay Musk to buy credits to reach their fleet standard. I didn’t see it in a cursory glance of the paper but there is a gas-guzzler tax on low mileage vehicles paid by the buyer. I paid almost $2000 to the federal government when I leased an 808hp Hellcat Superstock.
“You need to go re-read the paper.”
I quoted from the paper. Perhaps you should do the same.
Maybe it’s just a comprehension problem and ignorance on your side. Federal tax credits and CAFE are two different government intrusions on the free market. Musk no longer gets the tax credits and has advocated ending them, but he gets CAFE credits that he sells to other automakers.
“Maybe it’s just a comprehension problem and ignorance on your side.”
Ignorance. Its not something we have here…a bit like carbon credits, then. Thanks for the explanation.
Also car insurance will go up and not only for EV drivers. You driving an ICE could have an accident with an EV and you being the cause of the accident. It is now your company paying the new battery.
In Maryland, it’s no-fault auto insurance. Your insurance pays yours, their insurance pays theirs. Of course, if you both have the same insurance company. . .
The material cost of the subsidies might be small… but the overhead? City-folk who sheltered 3 years for COVID need to pay their cell phone bills.
EV’s also are significantly heavier than equivalent ICE vehicles, so stress the highways more, and are not paying any fuel taxes. Worse and worse.
The US doesn’t pay anywhere near the fuel tax most of the rest of the world pays.
When the article is folding in stuff like a country incentivising manufacturing industry growth as per
“In Canada, the federal government has handed out more than CAD$30 billion to automakers such as Volkswagen and Stellantis to lure them into building battery plants in southern Ontario.”
…you just know they’re maximising their “cost” to create controversy and ultimately clicks.
Everybody benefits from the roads, “gas tax” should be in the general fund.
People don’t always understand that assigning specific taxes to specific people is what makes tax systems complicated, and that complicated tax systems are what allow their intended targets to find loopholes.
For those who have not seen toll roads – the poor double their commute time taking back routes and the rich live close to their destination. The middle earners pay to preserve middle-distance commutes.
“allow their intended targets to find loopholes” is REALLY funny. The loopholes are specifically written into the tax code for the individual crony industries or individuals to use, there is NO accident there.
That’s the case in the UK, fuel duty, VAT on the fuel and VAT on the duty on the duty all go into the general tax pot. As do the taxes on the sales of new vehicles.
Which is why dedicated taxes were created (and of course subverted). I pay sales tax, excise taxes, and a state gas tax for my fuel. In theory, my gas tax goes to maintain the roads I drive on. In practice, the road funds are “borrowed” for pet projects, there’s a shortfall in the fund, the tax goes up, and more is Borrowed”. But we have brand new buses for no one to ride in, and lovely bike lanes for no one to ride in, and parks that no one can drive in, all paid for from the remaining funds that weren’t “Borrowed”.
“But we have brand new buses for no one to ride in…”
__________________________________________________________
Here in Milwaukee County, I do a survey of passengers in the County busses. I’ve never seen one full, totally empty isn’t unusual and just a few people five or six maybe seems to be the norm. I’ve been doing that for years.
I took a train from suburbs to city job for a few years long ago.Fares were set so it cost about the same either way. When a parking spot opened up at my company (perpetual waiting list) I chose “get there quick” and saved time at no added cost.
Point: The market for public transport labor and maintenance “grows into” whatever budget it would save.
Plus the labor was unfriendly and the maintenance was unthorough. I know – sour grapes.
Your “study” is anecdotal BUT why aren’t there any widely published studies showing the subsidized cost PER RIDER in the US from the gas taxes to each and every mass transit system?
I rode on a CAT bus in Las Vegas ONCE. The smell of the typical rider was enough to keep me from ever doing that again. Lyft of Uber well before the bus again.
I have been on lots of buses, trolleys and subway cars in Philadelphia where people had to stand, and some packed full. During off-peak hours, I have experienced Philly buses, trolleys and subway & “El” cars having a majority of their seats occupied. And in my experience in NYC, most buses and subway cars have a majority of their seats occupied during off-peak hours.
The cost is the cost. Whether it is printed on the sticker at the dealer’s showroom, or deeply hidden in your tax bill to pay the subsidies.
The problem is that you pay the sticker, while everyone is forced to pay the subsidies.
“The cost is the cost. Whether it is printed on the sticker at the dealer’s showroom, or deeply hidden in your tax bill to pay the subsidies.”
Or war in the middle east to ensure continuity of supply of oil?
War in the Middle East to pay off “campaign donations” (aka bribes) from defense contractors. Also to look “tough” for the LIVs of a jingoistic persuasion. And, yes, to get oil to cover up the deficiencies resulting from the “green” regulations that prevent domestic production.
I.e., normal operation of the “Democrat” Party.
The Republicans are going along with the Democrats on “Climate Change”, at least they aren’t challenging it. Maybe they own stock in the companies that will benefit.
There is plenty wrong with each party, but if one has to be in a fascist system, fascist light is preferrable. Democrats seem to be taking after Soros, willing to support terrorism and sell out their own constituents.
I hear this “war for oil” constantly, but can’t think of one place the US ever invaded and then lined up the tankers to steal oil, pumped, no doubt, by local roughnecks under Marine guard.
So the only reason for war in the middle east is oil?
Religion plus political and tribal disputes play no role at all?
“Religion plus political and tribal disputes play no role at all?”
Not the primary reason, no. There are plenty of conflicts around the world for all sorts of reasons but the US doesn’t have anything like the same involvement in them.
But you can assign whatever proportion you want.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/11/20/us-spent-6point4-trillion-on-middle-east-wars-since-2001-study.html#:~:text=Politics-,America%20has%20spent%20%246.4%20trillion%20on%20wars%20in%20the%20Middle,2001%2C%20a%20new%20study%20says&text=The%20U.S.%20wars%20in%20Afghanistan,since%20they%20began%20in%202001.
“The U.S. wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Pakistan have cost American taxpayers $6.4 trillion since they began in 2001.”
As a cost, that utterly dwarfs renewable subsidies and as “writing Observer” notes…The cost is the cost.
CNBC? Really?
There are lots of references regarding the cost of middle eastern wars for the US. They’re all in the Trillions. Choose your favourite. The cost is still the cost.
In much of the US, money from the road tax is used to build things like bicycle and pedestrian lanes, including over and under passes to allow them to cross roads without stopping.
Or getting injured and killed in a collision with a 2 tonne lump of metal, either through their own stupidity or some other reason
The university in my hometown bought a lane from the city so they could put in a bike lane. We live in an area where it snows 5 months of the year. It snowed today. The kids are gone during summer. So only about 4 months can it be used max.
What crock.
Don’t people other than kids ride bikes? Don’t people ride bikes in the summer? Don’t most of the cities in the US have their streets passable by bikes during most of the winter, unless they discriminate against bike lanes for snow clearing?
You don’t have snow where you live, do you?
EV’s require tires capable of carrying that extra weight, along with the longer braking distance and instant torque. That means more expensive tires.
That also means EV tires have to be replaced more often than ICE tires.
Thanks for the laughs! That just might be one of the dumbest comments I’ve seen all month, anywhere.
I confused is anything Paul said is not true? I certain Paul will have the last laugh.
They not only require more frequent tire changes, but the brakes and suspension have to be heavier and more expensive to handle the weight. And yes, EVs have brakes. They don’t just rely on regenerative braking. They need brakes to stop quickly in an emergency situation and they need brakes that can hold the car in place with the accelerator pedal completely depressed along with a host of other federal regulations.
Yes, EVs have brakes. And yes, EVs have traction batteries that reduce the use of brakes by 90% in normal driving. I’ve owned a dinky little EV for a decade and have never needed a brake job. EVs absolutely have their downsides — limited highway range, long charge times, extra up-front cost, and lower used-car value being among them.
But brakes? What horsepuckey! EVs are famous for “one-pedal” driving on account of those traction batteries. The same function that provides a bit of regenation also slows the vehicle, and not by a little bit. Your screed above is ignorant to the point of stupidity.
While the mechanics are different, in use an EV traction battery’s braking action is similar to the turbo diesel brake on by heavy-duty truck, which is 10 years old and has gone 107,000 miles without a brake job. It uses the turbo to slow the truck down, with the help of the handy button on the gear shift lever that enables me to easily downshift.
As I’ve noted, the EV traction batteries slow the vehicle in the process of regenerating electricity. You can float your crap here because there are a lot of knee-jerkers who know nothing at all, but anyone who’s actually owned an EV knows just how full of it you are.
As for suspensions, that’s indeed an issue with Tesla, as is Tesla’s general habit of paying insufficient attention to car basics apart from the propulsion side. Not only are their suspensions notorious, but so are their seals, windows, internal electrical systems, and accessories. It’s why if someone gave me a brand new Tesla, I would sell it and use the money to get an EV from a company that’s been in the ICEV car business.
As for extra weight, EV batteries typically add 1,000 to 1,500 pounds to the vehicle weight. People who think that somehow damages roads are idiots who know nothing about highway engineering and are too lazy to look it up. “Hold the car in place?” Are you joking? LOL
It is funny! I forgot to include the link from Continental Tires that describes EV’s tire requirements:
Direct your concerns to Continental. They’ve been manufacturing tires for 150 years, but I’m sure you can tell them a thing or two about their business.
Heavier light passenger vehicle “stress the highways more,” wrote the genius who has never actually bothered to look it up. Boy oh boy are there some stupid comments in this thread.
That which is sufficiently subsidized will proliferate.
It’s detailed, but it may not be complete. I didn’t see anything in the article about higher insurance costs. Assuming you can find any.
Higher insurance costs for EV and ICE owners. The ICE driver may be to blame for the collision so his/her/its/etc company has to pay the new battery.
There’s a great deal of exaggeration and/or misleading information in this post. First, Ford doesn’t “lose” $70K on each EV sold. The actual number is less than half that, and it is not a “loss:. In any event, Ford has retooled itself over the last several years from an exclusive ICV manufacturer to a manufacturer that is trying to bust into an existing mature EV market, therefore much or most of that “loss” is just capital investment (including R&D, design, retooling, and acquiring a supply chain) that has to be amortized over decades, not taken as a per vehicle immediate “loss”.
Just ask Honda about their capital investments when they decided to get into the executive jet business (“HondaJet”) more than a decade ago.
Writing like that can only come from a non-business professional who doesn’t understand business and economics.
Secondly, Ford is a very small volume EV producer – in the third quarter of 2023 Tesla outproduced Ford in EVs by a factor of more than 14:1 (479K vehicles produced vs. 34K vehicles produced). Like everything in industry, there is a huge effect from economies of scale that Ford is simply not capable of matching Tesla anytime soon. Tesla has been selling completed EVs since 2006, while Ford’s E division did not sell its first vehicle until 2012, and it has been a very slow growth curve ever since.
In any event, Tesla has a mature production line and product line selling EVs exclusively, and they are profitable – turning a 9.6% operating margin in third quarter 2023. If EVs were inherently a losing proposition by manufacturers, then explain that!
As for the costs of charging infrastructure, the Texas authors must be smoking crack. Retail charging station operators charge what must be supposed to be a profitable price for the charging power delivered – there are no hidden or subsidized costs there. The cost of the energy delivered by the commercial supercharging stations is still much lower than the cost of gasoline or diesel on a gallon of gas equivalent basis.
If one owns a Tesla the supercharging is free to the owner of the EV. For those who prefer to charge at home, even more money is saved than with non-Tesla commercial superchargers. A 120 volt slow charger can be installed by any homeowner for no installation cost, and the prices are only around $300, and a high capacity charger on 240 volts cost under $1,000 plus a couple hundred bucks for an electrician. Each of these charging station options are lifetime, meaning amortized over decades of us, and they just use already installed home electrical services.
Look, if you don’t want an EV, don’t buy one. In the US at least, nobody is forcing anybody to buy them. EVs are not justified solely on the basis of emissions controls and “climate change” – they make a great deal of sense to a lot of buyers – not all buyers, certainly, at least not yet (until super charging stations are more widely available). To oppose the warmunists on climate change ideology does not require you to hate EVs.
In the US at least, nobody is forcing anybody to buy them.
Yes we are being forced to buy them. Zealots like Newsom have banned the sale of new ICE cars by 2035.
Mr. Duane: EVs made sense to no buyers at all, only to enviros who don’t even want cars. Musk is harvesting subsidies just like Boone Pickens and his “I’m an oil guy who promotes windmills”. The joke is how charging infrastructure cost has been ignored by everybody. Each and every article that points to another fatal flaw in the EV ointment draws out the EV salesmen who can’t handle bad news. Your $300 EV charger installation is one of the all-time lies told by EV promoters here. Why would you tell such a fanciful lie??!!
Yes, subsidies are a major driver in the EV business and Musk is a master at harvesting them.
However, Duane’s cost for a level 1 charger is about right for here in the U.S. if one has a 15 amp circuit. In fact, there are several on Amazon for around $200 before tax. If one had to have a 15 amp circuit installed then the cost is going to be higher (parts could be about $100).
Figure about 3-5 miles for each hour of charge on a level 1 depending on the vehicle.
Mr. Scissor: “If one has a 15 amp circuit.” If you have an electric outlet already, you could plug into that, right? But that’s not how it works, is it? To make sure we aren’t talking past each other, are you saying the Class 1 charger plugs into an outlet? Duane said free install, electricians don’t work that cheap in USA. Bottom line is, the labor will cost far more than $300 to install a dedicated 15 amp, never mind the 240.
Yes, I am saying it plugs into an outlet. This is for a level 1 charger, which is suitable for short range vehicles as well as PHEVs.
If one needs electrical work done, then you are probably correct for many and maybe most situations.
No one needs electrical work for a Level 1 charger, and anyone with a 240v/30A electric dryer (the standard) doesn’t need it for a Level 2 charger either. The idea that people need to spend big money for a home EV charger is just laughable. People are being suckered on that one in a big way.
Maybe if your EV is a golf cart. To charge a 70 KVA battery in a true EV with a 240 20 amp outlet about 7K per hour which means ten hour to charge you EV. If you are like most people you don’t have an extra spot for another 240 volt breaker. So that will require a sub box and all the extras that requires. So if you have to hire it out it will cost bucks. Lastly if you only have a hundred amp service coming in, you are screwed.
So you’re going to unplug your dryer and plug in your charger? I’m pretty sure 240v plugs in the US are dedicated by code.
No they’re not “dedicated by code.” What tripe. I could easily post a picture of the 240v 30A outlet that my dryer plugs into, with the EV cord plugged in instead. But your knee is jerking, so I see no point.
And yes, unplug the dryer and plug in the car if you don’t have a 240v 30A circuit to the garage, and run an extension cord. You run your dryer every night? LOL
I guess I was unclear. By “dedicated” I meant that you have one single outlet on a single breaker or fuse. Where I live the 220v outlets are on the floor behind the appliance. Moving my dryer to plug an extension cord in every night to charge an EV would take more time and effort than pulling into and filling my ICEV at a gas station. Not to mention the length of the extension cord that would need to reach to the garage or outside. EVs are already a fire hazard, now you want to add a whole new level of danger.
On those subzero nights in January and February, do you really want the door to your garage (unsafe mode) or the outside open to let all the warm air out of your house and blowing snow into the house? I guess the solar panels on the roof can use the moonlight to generate heat lost by the open door.
You’re just being silly now. LOL
You have to keep your garage door all the way open to run an extension cord outside? I don’t, kid. LOL
Addled one, you’d only have to move the dryer once. There are these wonderful things called “splitters.” Look it up on Amazon, if you’re not too lazy. They cost about $35. You plug it into your 240v outlet. You plug the dryer into one of the two outlets on the splitter, and your EV extension cord into the other.
Just don’t try to run the dryer while the EV is charging. Do you think you can remember that, kid? LOL
So which is it? Is your dryer in the garage, did you drill a hole through the wall for the extension cord or do you leave the door open slightly for the extension cord when you are charging your SUV? The idea of an extension cord from my laundry room to the garage is not something I would ever think of doing. But then again, I live where it gets cold and the mice like to come in if they can. I don’t think running an extension cord from the inside to the outside through a wall meets code.
No, you would drill a very small notch in the corner of the door to your garage so you could run the cord without keeping the door open. You really aren’t very handy, are you? Do you call an electrician to change your ligfhtbulbs, bucko? LOL
Actually I just don’t want to live like a hillbilly in a firetrap. Your ideas are absurd. I would never have a permanent extension cord, especially not a 220v.
Well, then spend too much money. LOL
By the way, who needs a “permanent extension cord?” Stick it on a plastic reel and roll it out when you need to. You really aren’t very handy, are you? LOL
I ran the numbers myself to be sure. Your 3-5 mi/charging hour on Level 1 is on target. That’s why I have charged my EV (one of three vehicles, the others being ICEVs) on a Level 2 charger. What’s weird to me is my friend in Florida who charges his Chevy Bolt on a Level 1.
He doesn’t do a lot of driving, so I think he’s plugging it in every night or two. When he told me about it I was incredulous, but then I realized that he’s in his mid-70s and doesn’t go too far from home. 10 hours on his Level 1 would add 40 or 50 miles of range, Florida being warm and flat and his Bolt having very good fuel economy. He gets outstanding range, and isn’t the sort to pad any numbers. I even sent him a Kill-o-Watt meter and had him measure the kWh and the odometer.
I am genuinely baffled by these commenters who somehow think that 15A circuits are special. For God’s sakes, we have a couple dozen of those in our house, with 200A service for the whole place, and outlets everywhere. I can kinda-sorta understand why people who don’t know anything have been suckered into spending a couple grand for an unnecessary Level 2 “home charger,” but Level 1? I laugh hard at that one.
I notice that duane completely ignored most of the costs that were listed, such as the many subsidies. He just declares that everything is wrong, and as proof he declares that Ford isn’t losing as much money as claimed.
“I notice that duane completely ignored most of the costs that were listed, such as the many subsidies.”
There he goes again. Moaning about subsidies all the time hailing the breaks the oil industry gets. Have you no moral compass at all Mr Hypocrite?
What breaks exactly that oil companies get out side of the normal deprecation deductions?
Mr. Luhman: I know what you are trying to do, but with Simon, you will not get a true answer for the rest of the string.
The cable also needs to be correctly rated for 15AMP supply, you don’t just change the breaker out.
… and if it is 3-phase then a new external supply needs to drawn in to the sub-board.
Do you need 3-phase for your electric dryer? Didn’t think so. A level 2 charger (by far the most common for EVs) uses exactly the same amount of current, and the same outlet, as your electric dryer.
Mr. J: Oh, boy, an electrician comes in! Do you park your Tesla next to the dryer? You plug in your level 1 charger and the circuit pops, still don’t need an electrician? Is there some magnetic field around an EV that causes truth to go out the window for you folks?
If I had a Tesla, I’d probably use a Level 2 cord, i.e. 240v30A because . If I didn’t have a 240v30A circuit going to the garage, yes, I’d run an extension cord. No electrician needed. By the way, the standard 120v circuit handles 15A, and a typical Level 1 charger uses that or less. Call your electrician. LOL
I’d use 240v30A for a Tesla because the battery is bigger, and Level 2 would supply about 6 kWh per hour of charging. Given how EV charging works in the real world, for the size of the batteries in Teslas (and the other newer EVs) you’d want Level 2.
That said, I have a friend who charges his Chevy Bolt (65 kWh battery) via Level 1. Takes forever, but he doesn’t drive much. You know nothing about EVs, or about standard household electric circuits, but yammer away!
Even my first-generation discounted EV came with a level 1 charging cable that plugged into a standard household outlet. The new ones come with that, and a level 2 charging cable that plugs into a 240v outlet. Everyone has 240v outlets for their electric dryers. Push comes to shove, run an extension cord.
Here, Mr. J thinks we can just run a 240v extension cord from your laundry room to your car. What’s holding us back, folks?
His clothes won’t be very dry.
Mr. Nice: Well, it’ll only take a few hours after the car is charged.
So you run your clothes dryer every night? Either you have a really big household, or major digestive issues. LOL
I don’t know where you live, but either the electrical code is non-existent or you’ve turned your house into a fire hazard.
How so, genius? LOL
Permanent 220v extension cord from inside to outside?
Sure, why not?
“Your $300 EV charger installation is one of the all-time lies told by EV promoters here.”
I read the other day that it costs about $6000.00 to have an electrician wire up a Tesla charging station in your garage.
“I read the other day that it costs about $6000.00 to have an electrician wire up a Tesla charging station in your garage.”
If you read that you might want to not read from that source again. Mine was wired in for about $600NZ which would be about $350US. It was a half day job.
Well, here’s a source, the first one that came up on Google.
https://cleantechnica.com/2021/12/10/the-costs-of-installing-a-home-charger-for-your-tesla/
“Nonetheless, answering the question of how much it costs to install a Tesla charger as broadly and usefully as possible, in general, a Tesla charger installation typically costs somewhere between $1000 and $7000+. That is just the installation cost, not including the cost of the Tesla charger itself.”
It’s a good article. It tells all about charging your electric car.
10 years ago it cost me $1500 to run a new 15 amp circuit in a 100 year old house. That’s where the $7000+ comes in.
Yes, if you have to upgrade your electrical service to handle an EV, you’re going to have to spend some money.
Mr. Simon: If he reads your comments, he’s familiar with “bad information source”. I’m sure he’s wary, and he thinks you are lying about the cost of install.
You obviously don’t have an EV. Look, bucko, all you need to charge an EV overnight is a 240v 30A outlet. You know, the same one that you use for your electric dryer? Run an extension cord. Anyone who spends thousands for a home charger is a sucker.
No, I don’t have an EV, bucko.
I know all about charging an EV, though.
Mr. Abbott: When he calls you “bucko”, you are winning. To Mr. J, anyone who buys an EV is the sucker. Go ahead and keep sucking.
No, bucko, anyone who spends thousands on a “EV charging station” is a classic consumer sucker. All it takes is an extension cord to the same outlet as an electric dryer, plus a charging cord. Total cost: a couple hundred bucks, and maybe a lot less if the Level 2 cord came with the EV.
Do you park your EV in the laundry room? How do you run an extension cord from inside the house to outside the house without closing the door?
You have to charge your EV outside? Why? Too much garbage in the garage? LOL
Oh, and you really think a garage door must be open to run an extension cord from the garage outside? Are you actually THAT incapable? Here, child, let me help you! LOL
The garage is the outside.
“The garage is the outside,” it blurted, incoherently. LOL
Why are you so obnoxious? Are you 12 years old?
Mr. J: When you say “bucko” again, we can’t tell if you’re replying to me or Mr. Abbot. But you’re on such a tear, there’s no sense pointing out your error at this point. Above, you suggest a 240v splitter and extension cord. Are these made in China these days? (Are they made anywhere else??) Quality control there is a bit lacking, yet you have no idea that you are creating a fire hazard? No use talking to you anymore.
Find them on Amazon, bucko. First you tried to claim that you can’t run an extension cord outside without closing the garage door. I posted a picture that shows how stupid that claim of yours wayt, and now you are playing the China card? You’re a desperate buckaroo, I’d say. LOL
Mr. J: Just as I predicted, you can’t keep your buckos straight. I said nothing about a garage door, so you have confused your buckos, and I don’t feel obliged to help you straighten it out. Oh, alright, I’ll give you a hint- I’m the bucko who made you look like a fool. Hmmm, that doesn’t really help, that group of buckos includes you!
You’re a bucko who doesn’t know a single thing about EVs or residential wiring. LOL
“…in the third quarter … Ford … 34K vehicles …“34,000 vehicles per quarter = 380 cars per day 7 days per week. or 136,0000 cars per year. It took Model T more than 10 production years to reach that volume.
Point was going to be – low volume? thats a lot of cars.
Low volume is Space X.
The population is a lot larger and a lot wealthier than it was when Ford started making the Model T.
True. Yet Ford sold 7x more Model T’s than all combined Tesla models.
The population a lot wealthier ? Are you sure ?
Yes. I could write all sorts of self-flattery, but instead I’ll stick with: A royal of an 18th century European state could not aquire goods and services many poorer Americans consider dreck, not for any price.
I think a lot of tech is gimmicky time wasting, but look at all our peers wasting time. Wasting time is a luxury, even if it feels like work.
I hope my kids have it even easier than I have had it, though I expect they’ll never even know.
380 per day is very low volume for an auto assembly plant. A single assembly line plant should be able to build 800-1000 vehicles a day on two shifts. That’s the economics of vehicle assembly.
A gallon of gas = 33.7kWh = A gallon of gas without tax wholesale is $2.26 US a gallon = 6.7 cent a kWh. Tesla charges 25 cents.
The gallon of gasoline will deliver around 10kWh at the wheels so, more realistically, 22.6c/kWh for gasoline. The Tesla will put around 80% of the electricity from the power grid to the wheels so actual cost to wheels is more like 31c/kWh. Fast charging might take it a tad lower than 80%.
Australia uses fuel stations as tax collectors. We are paying around AUD2/l, which equates to USD4.9 per gallon – half is tax. Europe is much higher. There is no road tax on EVs in Australia. This is a major subsidy for EVs. But then all retail electricity has a renewable energy target component that is theft from consumers paid to owners of weather dependent generators plus a government tax of 10%. Electricity costs in Australia average around 40c/kWh (26c/kWh in USD). EVs enjoy tax benefits compared with ICE in Australia.
Insurance costs and inconvenience will end EVs. They are not easy to live with.
“The Tesla will put around 80% of the electricity from the power grid to the wheels”
Because state sponsored monopoly allows utilities to set prices that cover expenses, you also pay for line losses between the generator and the home charger.
Insurance costs will end all car driving.
The ICE driver may be to blame for the collision so his/her/its/etc company has to pay the new battery. With more EVs on the road it will be more likely to hit one.
Insurance = 2nd government.
The energy equivalent of a gallon of gas, minus the loss between the plug and the wheels, will deliver round about 25 kWh to the wheels.
Care to, for once, provide alternate figures, or at least attempt to demonstrate why you believe to the figures given to be inaccurate?
What with it with you and your desire to prove all criticisms of EVs must be done from invalid motives.
“Less than half that”
Incorrect
Ford Lost $62,016 For Every EV It Sold In 3Qhttps://robertbryce.substack.com/p/ford-lost-62016-for-every-ev-it-sold
The first figure is the loss for the previous (2nd) quarter, the $62k+ figure is for 3Q.
Note that both figures are higher than the U.S. dearler price of the low-end “working” vehicle, the electric E-Transit 350. These are a glut on the market due to overproduction for anticipated buys for delivery services: it turns out that EVs don’t work for people who do work.
Ford was the only manufacturer to post per unit losses, as far as I know, but they did divest from Rivian, and Tesla’s losses are taken for granted, as their reported profit is steadily decreasing as subsidies decline and long-term costs are realized just like any public-private pyramid scheme.
https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/TSLA/tesla/gross-profit
If or when the clown’s plates begin to drop off their sticks, Tesla will go down in history as this generations’ Enron.
Super charging stations can’t become widely available without orders-of-magnitude increase in generation and distribution capability, and don’t fix the problem — they merely increase the cost per mile and increase CO2 from electrical generation. Just as they did 16 years ago, they still run on coal and methane.
I agree with dk, but I also though Jeff Bezos was full of crap when he ran the massive money loser that became Amazon.The difference might be Amazon allowed people good deals and convenient participation, where EVs appear to be a big pain in the …
Amazon doesn’t make it’s money on selling goods. It’s profits come from AWS and the handling of others’ sales on Amazon.com. They charge for the entire life cycle of the sale from taking the product in at the fulfillment center to having returns destroyed. And if you want to make money selling your product you have to pay for placement. I know a young man who pays $50k a month to have his product show #1 when you search for the generic product. He gets a lot of sales for that money but he takes all the risk. Amazon takes no risk.
Look, if you don’t want an EV, don’t buy one. In the US at least, nobody is forcing anybody to buy them. EVs are not justified solely on the basis of emissions controls and “climate change” – they make a great deal of sense to a lot of buyers – not all buyers, certainly….
In the UK at least they are being forced to buy one. From January 2024, for all car manufacturers, at least 20% of their sales must be EVs. Rising to 80% from 2030. For every ICE they sell over the limit, they are fined £15,000.
But this isn’t the real problem with EVs. The problem is that they are not the same product as an ICE car, they don’t meet the same applications. Activists and politicians always talk as if they were plug compatible substitutes, but they are not.
Consider: they take at least 5 times as long to refuel. And, at public chargers, cost more to refuel. They have limited range so they refuel more often. Worse in winter, with heating and defrost on. They cost more to buy. They cost more to insure. If they are fast-charged the batteries wear out sooner. Even if not, they have limited life and cost as much as the car is worth to replace, so the used value falls faster than for ICE. The smallest accident leads to a write-off because of possible battery damage. And there’s the fire risk, which is increasingly going to limit where you can use and park them. Eurotunnel?
The UK has tiny distances compared to the US. But even in the UK the value proposition to the buyer is completely different for the two technologies. People may not take trips longer than 50 miles very often, but the ability to do so without worrying about refuelling is a big part of their value proposition for an ICE car. Propose to them that they pay a lot more for a vehicle with less range, less functionality, and I suspect many are going to revalue whether they really need a car, or can manage to live without what will seem like an expensive luxury for short local trips.
The ripple effect from what will turn into a buyer’s strike, coupled with the ripple effects from the changed patterns of use for those that are sold, will be very great. Something which no planners seem to have given any serious thought to.
There are parallels. A bit like the lack of serious thought to what happens if you replace our current 24 x 7 reliable electricity suppy with one subject to frequent blackouts because of intermittency. Life will not just go on as normal. The two services are not plug compatible replacements one for the other, and that has consequences.
You make a number of reasonable points, but the new generation of EVs will go >200 miles on a charge.
For a real world experience with a hybrid van, see my post above.
In summary, I calculate an equivalent cost per gallon of $17.60 for my first 50,000 miles and a cost of $9.80 per gallon if I drive to 100,000 miles. After subsidies and warranty coverage, those numbers are $3.45 and $2.80.
Ford reported they will lose $3 billion dollars on EVs this year. That’s not investment amortized over decades, that’s this years loss. Tesla didn’t reach a cumulative total of 500k vehicles until 2019. They are not that mature. They just haven’t upgraded the models they have in production so their costs are dropping. How many Cybertrucks has Tesla sold.
Ford totally screwed up their F-150 Lightning. Their whole charging routine is the joke from hell. I read about it, and laughed at Ford. They deserve to lose a boatload of money. The stupdity is mind boggling. The required the use of a smartphone app to plug the vehicle to a charger. Not only is that insane — imagine having to use an app to plug in a space heater — but half the time the app doesn’t even work.
There is NO reason for that. Whoever designed all of that for Ford should be taken out behind some barn and shot. LOL
That’s your opinion, which I don’t value very highly. And from your comments I would say you know nothing about vehicles or electrical safety. And if you would stop calling people names and pretending to be the smartest man in any room, then maybe we wouldn’t put you in the same class as some of the alarmists.
A significant difference between ICE vehicles and EVs is depreciation.
EVs start costing more and soon lose more of their value.
A 5 year old ICE will have lost 60% of its value. But can still be used or sold on with 40% of its value available to go towards a new one.
A 5 year old EV needs a new battery so will have lost 90% of its value. And cannot be reliably used without that new battery.
This is significant for individuals who buy EVs. But that is a calculation individuals must make related to their own income. But in Europe, when everyone is mandated to lose that money through depreciation, it will have a negative impact on the whole economy.
That money is gone. It cannot provide security through savings or growth through investment.
It’s going to lower Europe’s GDP for a decade, at least.
I’d suggest ICE drivers stop at a gas station in the morning and evening and only put one gallon of gas in your tank each stop. If you’re going on a long trip, then dispense a few gallons, take an hour nap in the backseat and then dispense a few more gallons after you wake up.
Maybe a taxi that always fast charges and is always on the road but not a normal owner. You should get at least 200k miles from a Tesla battery and that’s at least 10 years at 20k miles per year. More if you look after the battery.
Here’s a reference
https://www.jdpower.com/cars/shopping-guides/how-often-do-tesla-batteries-need-to-be-replaced
Where they suggest 10-20 years.
The article says you will be fine as long as
— you don’t expose it to hot weather
— you don’t fast charge, or not much.
They should probably have added, don’t drive through pooled water!
This is the problem. Its not the same product as ICE, it doesn’t fit the same application. You cannot avoid driving in the summer, and that is hot. You cannot avoid, if you take a long trip, using fast chargers. Are you going to park overnight in a highway filling station while it slow charges? Of course not.
The piece also says that its 10-20 year life should be regardless of who makes the batteries. Don’t believe it.
Governments can mandate EVs. Quite a lot are. Its a case of, when your current car meets end of life, either buy an EV or walk. Or buy a used ICE and drive it into the ground.
If you have safe parking a safe distance away from your house, if you can afford the purchase price and the insurance, if all your driving is local, an EV may suit very well. If you are getting it paid for tax free by your company, as most UK buyers are, that will make a big difference to the cost benefit too.
There is a legitimate case for a government to mandate EVs in some circumstances, eg cities, to clean the air. There is also a legitimate case for restricting all cars in cities, to provide more quiet street space for walking and biking.
There is no case for pretending that EVs are the same product as ICE cars, just with different fuel. They are not. And don’t pretend that the move is going to leave life carrying on as before. It won’t.
Tesla warranties 70% range at 80k miles. So yes, you can go 10 years but you will be charging more often.
“A 5 year old EV needs a new battery”
Bollocks…..
“A 5 year old EV needs a new battery”
Most EV sellers offer warranties of 8 years on the batteries so your five years is garbage. The blade batteries in the BYD’s are looking like going 20 years plus. And….They will only get better.
Yes, they do last more than five years at the moment. Whether the BYD batteries will last 20+? And what proportion of them will? At what level of capacity, in real life day to day usage? We will have to see. The more people try to use them as they currently use ICE cars, the more fast charging there will be, and this will lower battery life. So I would not bet on 20+ years, and I certainly would not buy a used EV off rental or off company car lease, where the owner and driver has no incentive to minimize fast charging.
The fundamental point remains. The dream is to just replace ICE cars with EVs, and have everything carry on as now. And this is impossible. The key factor is not how long the batteries last in general. Its whether EVs meet the same application, and they obviously don’t. You have far longer refuel times, even if people are using fast chargers. Its 30 minutes minimum versus 5 minutes. Then, you have lower range, especially in winter when the heater is used, and in summer when AC is used, so refuelling with these longer times will happen more often.
Read here for some estimates of how many charging points will be needed. Its not going to happen.
https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2023/10/24/mega-jolt_the_costs_and_logistics_of_plugging_in_evs_are_about_to_become_supercharged_987493.html#%2F%2Ffind%2Fnearest%3Fcountry=US
They are still much more expensive to buy and insure. You are going to have increasing restrictions on parking and use, because of the fire hazard.
Again, its not how often they catch fire. That’s not the driver. Its quite rare. Its what happens when they do, the inability to put them out, the speed and intensity of the blaze. A fire breaks out on Eurotunnel, for instance, or in a shopping mall with underground parking. The consequences don’t bear thinking about, and this is why you will have restrictions.
All this means that they are not going to replace ICE cars either in sales or in usage. Governments may mandate them, and may ban ICE cars, but the consequence will not be like for like replacement, but will be huge social and economic changes.
The other part of the dream is to fuel them from wind generated electricity. Even if you could build enough, even if you could get it to the filling stations, even if you could put in enough charging points at the filling stations, its clear now that its going to be far more expensive than gasoline to refuel (see the recent capacity auction failure in the UK, and the pronouncements of industry about how much higher prices are going to have to be to make the next one succeed).
Its not going to happen. That is, we are not going to replace ICE vehicles with EVs fuelled from wind, and have everything else carry on just the same as now. No matter how long the batteries last.
$17 a gallon? Ok, now add in the 100 million a day paid by US O&G in taxes royalties and resource leases and the income taxes paid by 1 million well-paid employees plus their contribution to the commercial economy. That will be lost by governments with a switch over. And the rest of the world? US O&G pays foreign governments income tx double what they pay domestically!
People who calculate environmental type costs seem unaware of ‘mass balance’ (holistic) accounting.
The full original article doesn’t seem worth reading but their cost figure seems like pure nonsense. Fuel costs are substantial but they differ considerably between very common ICE vehicles. Also, I just received an insurance bill. It is up more than 100% from a year ago and now one year of insurance is about equal to three years of gasoline purchases when compared against my fuel use of the last year and a half. I’ve never filed an insurance claim and haven’t had a traffic ticket in more than 40 years. Does their “cost per gallon” have any intelligent meaning?
Yes
Then it must relate in some direct way to miles traveled. Regardless, can that “intelligent meaning” be described in words?
The article includes as costs: gov subsidies (including parts of the IRA [aka Inflation Induction Act]
and EV insurance (which is higher than for an ICE).
In 2021 I got 2 quotes on insuring a Tesla 3 vs a Hyundai sedan and the Tesla was $600/yr more.
Had you done so, you wouldn’t have had to ask.
But, good point, they didn’t seem to count the cost of insurance, or anticipated the much advertised cost increases in both insuring drivers and in homeowner’s insurance for in-garage charging.
While the article and other commenters have tried to note the expected added costs to road maintenance due to weight, the study also seems to miss the increased owner cost of tire replacement due to wear.
I had the homeowners insurance discussion elsewhere and challenged someone to proivide any evidence that the insurance carriers are either denying coverage or rasing rates for EV owners. Nada. I checked myself, and no evidence of it.
The idea that road maintenance costs go up because of the additional battery weight is laughable. People who make the claim have never looked into it. There’s a longstanding equation that details this, and no, an extra 1,500 pounds for a battery is NOTHING when it comes to highway wear and tear. Anyone who isn’t too lazy to check for themselves will see it right away.
As numbers like this come to the forefront, both consumers and manufacturers are taking a harder look at EV viability. Ford, GM, Stellantis, Honda, Mercedes-Benz, and even Tesla are cutting back production or further plans for it it due to lagging sales and growing unsold inventories. These companies shot themselves in the foot by setting their prices too high from the outset in the belief that government subsidies would entice readers into buying regardless just to do their bit in the climate fight. Except when buyers realized that even with these incentives EVs were still priced 30-50% higher than their gas/diesel counterparts, they wisely backed off leaving the producers with consistent losses and a re-assessment of whether they’re wise to continue with their current EV marketing model. And when Car&Driver magazine shows that of the top-selling US auto/lt. truck models so this year only two are EVs, it’s obvious the demand for them was greatly overestimated.
Yes the early adopters have adopted-
Ford, GM, Mercedes come clean on EV demand weakness (msn.com)
Dealers Are Turning Away Electric Cars As Demand Cools (businessinsider.com)
While the rental market has second thoughts on EV costs and they would know-
Hertz Slows Down EV Plans As Tesla Price Cuts, Repair Costs Affect Profits (msn.com)
while the insurance industry works out for how much and even whether or not they’ll actually insure these incendiary devices. The EV fad is over.
The problem with Teslas isn’t really with the EV side. Teslas are known for being deficient on the car side: suspensions, seals, body panels. All the boring stuff that Elon Musk doesn’t care about. The man has a major blind spot regarding ordinary components.
I have a Starlink dish, and there’s an almost laughable (until it goes out) weak link: The cable that connects the router inside the house to the dish outside. The dish is authentic high tech. The satellites and the rockets are authentic high tech. The cables are low-tech, so they ignored a basic issue, which is how much current they can carry.
Musk loves his rocket science, but his cars and satellite dishes wind up failing because he didn’t hire experienced car people for the regular stuff, and didn’t hire a talented community college graduate to design those Starlink cables.
These are the operating costs. There is also the naughty co2 footprint the EV travels on from manufacture.
Volvo did a study some time ago, I’ll try and dig it up, where it claimed it took on average 9 years to claw back the co2 emissions from the manufacturing of a specific EV model. Close enough to a decade of ownership before you are nut- zero. These additional emissions derive from the additional mining and processing of the metals required for the battery and motors on top of the steel, plastic, glass etc etc.
Interesting also as I think Volvo intend to offer only EV vehicles within a few years.
There was a study on that about a decade ago. Bottom line: No difference in CO2 emissions associated with manufacturing EVs vs. manufacturing ICEVs. If you care about CO2 — and I do not — in operation using the overall U.S. electricity generation mix, an EV emits 50%-60% of the CO2 per mile driven compared to the equivalent ICEV.
To me, it doesn’t matter, because I think the CO2 issue is phony. But those are the right numbers.
Please show us that study. I’m sure it was done by an EV enthusiast magazine and is complete gibberish. Just like the “study” on fires where they used the current year sales numbers if EVs and ICEVs instead of total vehicle fleet numbers for calculating the risk of vehicle fire. Adding in the 230 million existing ICEVs in the calculation significantly reduces the fire risk of ICEVs.
I could give you the numbers, but it wouldn’t matter. Your far right knee will keep jerking. LOL
By the way, when I looked at the numbers about 10 years ago, the CO2 reduction was about 40% because coal was still about 30% of the U.S. generation mix. Now it’s 18%, replaced mostly by natural gas and some by wind. Natural gas emits half the CO2 per kWh generated that coal does.
That’s why I wrote 50% to 60% above. I already wrote that I think the CO2 issue is phony, but sometimes I look at things out of curiosity. If that number is adjsuted for the generation mix where EVs are most popular, the CO2 number would be even lower for EVs.
All this ever was for me was an aside, from the time when I did a deep dive on all things EV and all things electricity generation. Again, I think the entire CO2 issue is phony, but I looked anyway, just for the hell of it. I didn’t use any ax-grinding source; I went to the primary source instead and did my own work.
You sre a laughbly ignorant, knee-jerking fool, not to mention a complete sucker for spending $2,400 on a dedicated home charger for your plug-in hybrid vehicle. They really saw you coming! LOL
I don’t have a hybrid or an EV. But I do see that you are a little twit whose ignorance is only surpassed by your arrogance.
Mr. J: The self reply, always the sign of a deep thinker.
No, the self reply was to add information, bucko. LOL
What about the cost of your second garage, at least fifty meters from the house?
“at least fifty meters from the house?”
On an inner-city suburban block?
That is, after-all, where most EV virtue-seekers roost.
Those people won’t have any vehicle, and will be riding public transit …with the (icky) public.
While this is interesting and useful what would really be useful would be a chart. ICE vehicles on one side EV on the other. On the far left would be a list of all subsidies, tax preferences, mandates and regulatory preferences. In each appropriate box a check mark would be made indicating whether or not the ICE or EV receives that benefit or list the dollar amount received.
Exactly why should EVs be subsidized at all? Maybe the feds subsidize alternate models of outboard motors, lawn mowers, chain saws pogo sticks and radios but I don’t know anything about those. Since when does the government’s obligation or choice of forms of transportation extend to financial subsidies? It must be the general welfare clause but that welfare isn’t general, it’s very specific.
I completely agree about that. I see no reason to subsidize EVs. The market should rule.
Mr. J: The market relies on accurate information, and false reports of “no costs for charger install” is not helping.
All anyone needs to charge an EV at home is a cable that costs at most a couple hundred bucks. These people who spend thousands on installing “home charging stations” are complete suckers. Not the first time the American consumer has been hoodwinked, and won’t be the last. I know what I’m talking about, having owned an EV for a decade. And a 1-ton diesel truck, and a mid-sized gas-powered SUV.
Oh, and that Ford F-150 lightning? What a joke. Not because it’s electric, but because Ford totally screwed up on the charging side of things. They deserve every loss they’re making on those things.
Mr. J: You say you know what you’re talking about, but you talk too much, and show, demonstrate really, that you don’t. You seem to be a rather new commenter here, my advice to you is to read more and comment less. And I’m sure you’ll take that advice. Not.
So now you’re down to ad hominem attacks. Jerk that knee! By the way, I’ve been commenting on this site for years. Helpful advice: Never assume anything, and try not to just make it up. LOL
$70,000 ???
Reports claim Ford took an operating loss of nearly $37,000 on every EV it sold last quarter.
I suppose there is more than one way to calculate such things.
That sounds about right. Here is my experience with a hybrid van I bought in 2018. These numbers are rough but are in the ballpark. The extra cost of the van over the ICE ($10,000), the home charger($2,400) and the battery recall this year ($11,000) adds up to $23,400. I now have 50,000 miles on it, about half on the plugin electricity. The van gets 33 miles per charge and about 33 miles per gallon of gas, thanks to regenerative braking. I would get more miles from the plugin feature but we drive 1000 miles every time we visit our grandchildren. It costs $2.00 in electricity to charge the battery. Thus far, then, I have gotten 25,000 miles from the plug in feature. If we divide 25,000 miles by 33 miles per battery charge we get roughly 1500 charging cycles, which in my van is the same as 1500 gallons of gas. SO…. $23,400 in extra cost divided by 1500 gives $15.60 per gallon. (Don’t forget that in my van one full battery charge gives the same mileage as a gallon of gas.) Add in the $2.00 per gallon equivalent for the electricity, and so far the cost for a “gallon of gas” for my van is $17.60.
Assuming no further hybrid expenses (my charger won’t break, electricity prices won’t go up), by 100,000 miles the cost will be reduced to $9.80 per gallon of gas equivalent.
But, before you pity me for these high costs, realize that between government subsidies and warranty coverage, my extra cost for this van is only $2,200. So my true cost for a gallon of gas equivalent so far is $3.45 and at 100,000 miles will only be about $2.80 cents. Not bad.
This leaves out a lot. For example, lost investment income. Right now, $23,500 in a money market account would generate $1,175 dollars per year. That would buy, after 33% tax rate, about 200 gallons of gas, which would allow the van to about 6,000 miles. Instead, if I put that money into a IRA, at 5%, I would have 100,000 in thirty years. As an old retired guy living off my previous savings, I understand the time value of money. On the other hand, if I sell my house, I might recoup money on my home charger, which made up the bulk of my out of pocket expenses of $2,200.
Anyway you look at is, the economics of EV’s are insane.
That’s an expensive battery for 33 mile range!
It certainly is. I am very much in favor of plug-in hybrids, but only if the battery is much bigger than the one in his van. Battery costs have declined quite a bit, and at this point if they’d stick a 60 kWh battery into a PHEV, the vehicle would make a very good all-conditions, long-range transport.
I believe Chrysler chose a 16KwH battery because that was the smallest size that qualified for the US govt tax rebate and MD state tax rebate, which were crucial in my decision to buy this vehicle. Green energy is all about government subsidies. This size batttery is fine for driving around town. Especially with a level 2 charger, I can do several trips per day and recharge between trips. Long range trips I get about 33 to 36 mpg on the ICE, depending how how fast I drive.
The only person to blame for buying that $2,400 home charger is the fool in your mirror. It was a stupid purchase, and even if you won’t admit it here, you know it. To charge that battery, you didn’t even need a 240v outlet. You could do from a standard 120v household outlet. Welcome to the Brotherhood of American Suckers. You were hosed.
I guess you missed the part where my costs are less than the price of gasoline these days. You had to read to the end to find that out. Without the charger, I would not be using the plug in power nearly as much.
I am indifferent to the marginal cost differences between ICE and hybrids or the cost of the charger at current pricing levels. My car runs on gasoline and anything else you can burn to make electricity. If gas prices skyrocket it won’t affect me much. Having driven a hybrid, quiet, clean, and with regenerative braking, I’ll never go back. I can sit in parking areas that warn against engine idling and run my A/C or heating to be comfortable. ICE’s are just too primitive for me now. In traffic, in an ICE, you want to speed up, you create heat by burning gas. if you want to slow down, you create heat by degrading your brake pads. I’m beyond that.
BTW, why are you so angry you insult strangers on the internet?
You paid $2,400 for a home charger. Have a straight talk with the sucker in your mirror. This time, don’t deflect. You were taken.
Reflect that a large part of the money was spent running a 240 circuit the entire length of the house through the basement and then running the wire outside to the charging device. The car is never garaged. This required an electrician. Your suggestion that I charge the car off a 120 volt circuit in the garage is both laughable and dangerous.
So the $2,400 wasn’t for a home charger like you said it was. What’s “laughable and dangerous” abou a Level 1 charger? You wrote that your PHEV goes 33 miles on a charge, which stronly implies that you’re uploading about 10 kWh into the battery.
At 120v/12A, that would take 7 hours from zero to 100. Perfect for an overnight charge. I have a friend who recharges his Chevy Bolt’s 65 kWh battery with a Level 1 charger.
Face it: You are fool who was putty in the hands of a salesman. LOL
You constantly speculate, project and are constantly wrong. It takes 14 hours to charge my car with 120 volts. That is not quick enough. The level 2 charger does the job in about 2 hours 20 minutes. This am did some errands around town. Used 30 miles. Charging car right now to go shopping later on this pm. Then will charge it again before I go out tonight.
LOL. You paid $2,400 for something you never needed.
I did not need a new hybrid minivan, either. I wanted it.
You do raise the question of what we need versus what we want and acquire. Look around your house and reflect.
p.s.: My Level 1 charger allows you to select different amperages. Most of them do. If it’s taking 14 hours, you selected 7A. Next time try 12A, kid. LOL
I do not have a level charger. Just the charger that came with the vehicle.
Um, child, every EV comes with a charger. LOL
Oh, and all chargers are “level chargers.” If you got suckered into $2,400 to run a 240v line, you are using a Level 2 charger. LOL
I meant to say that the charger that was free with the car takes 14 hours to charge the battery on a 120 volt line. I do not know if that charger would be considered a level 1 charger or not. Another reason for installing the level 2 charger was that in the future, were I to buy an EV, a level 2 charger would be essential.
You have a funny attitude about money. I paid a few hundred dollars to get an electrician to run a 120 volt line outside to our new patio. He had to install a circuit breaker and drill through the wall, etc. I did not have a power outlet there for the old patio. But, I wanted that outlet so I paid the money. Was I suckered?
Doing quite the dance there. Yes, and if you want to use a Level 2 charger, you could easily plug it into electric dryer outlet. You spent $2,400 because you were suckered. LOL
I believe you need to hardwire the Level 2 charger. Also, my 240 dryer outlet is not accessible unless you move the dryer, which is very difficult in my house, requiring either two people or a jack stand, since it is in a small, narrow elevated alcove.
Should I sell my house, that charger will add some value to it, like the 120 volt outlet for the new patio. And, given inflation, installing a level 2 charger in a couple of years will be much more expensive and may or may not quality in the future for a subsidy. I am assuming as they mandate more EV’s in my state (my state MD has adopted CA’s mandates for EV’s sales), so many people will be installing chargers that the state will not be able to afford to subsidize them. In my case, there was a long delay in the subsidy because the subsidy fund had been exhausted, and the legislature had to authorize additional funds for it. There is no guarantee that the legislature will have the money to refurbish that fund in the future.
No, you don’t need to “hardwire the Level 2 charger.” If you’re a sucker who’s too lazy to check anythimg out, you’ll buy some unit costing thousands. If you have a third digit in uyour IQ, here’s what ypu will do:
https://www.amazon.com/VEVOR-Level-EV-Charger-Adjustable/dp/B09YTY5DDT/ref=sr_1_28?crid=3CW00CVI41EMO&keywords=level+2+ev+charging+cord&qid=1699028110&sprefix=level+2+ev+charging+co%2Caps%2C1248&sr=8-28
https://www.amazon.com/Rophor-Extension-Lighted-Charging-Certification/dp/B08NXBSX58/ref=sr_1_59?crid=2BLSD2PLKP3LK&keywords=240v%2Bextension%2Bcord&qid=1699028377&sprefix=240v%2Bextension%2Bco%2Caps%2C2189&sr=8-59&th=1
https://www.amazon.com/ONETAK-Splitter-Welding-Connector-Connecter/dp/B086S688KV/ref=sr_1_10?keywords=240v+splitter&qid=1699028650&sr=8-10
Once you have stopped drooling and being completely stupid, you will plug your EV into your electric dryer outlet and you will stop making a knee-jerking fool out of yourself on WUWT.
Oh, and now you claim that you can’t move your clothes dryer? You’ve slip’d the surly bonds of earth and touched the face of God! LOL
I am trying to imagine the Rube Goldberg arrangement after I put a splitter behind my dryer and run a 240 volt extension cord across the floor of my washroom into my garage and then out under the garage door to the parking pad where I keep and charge my van.
I can’t imagine it. An exposed wire with two hundred forty volts is no joke.
I can though imagine my insurance company would not like that much. Do you think State Farm would pay to rebuild my house if it burned down due to such a rude arrangement?
I did a brief google check. Here is what one source says about using the dryer outlet:
“A common question we hear is “If I already have a 240V dryer outlet in my garage, can I use that for my EV?”
Great thought, but the answer is no — unless you plan on removing your dryer. You need a dedicated circuit for your EV charger. Getting a new circuit and having your level 2 charger hardwired into it is easy when you use Kopperfield to request a residential install from a licensed electrician.”
You constantly speculate, project, and provide wrong and, in this case, dangerous misinformation.
https://www.kopperfield.com/blog/level-2-charging-at-home
Well, I would advise you to get a shielded extension cord. A 50A circuit? Excuse me, but dryers run at 30A. But hey, if you want to spend too much money, it’s your choice. LOL
I did not mention 50 amps anywhere. My dryer draws 26 amps.
Quick checking on line says that level II chargers should be able to deliver about 45 amps, as that is the current draw of EV’s. In my case, since it takes about 2.5 hours to get about 16KwH into my battery, my crude calculation suggests that is is drawing about 28 amps, same as the dryer.
I start with a disclosure. I own a one-ton diesel pickup, a mid-sized gas SUV, and a dinky little EV bought 10 yars ago out of the bankruptcy of Think at a 70% discount. I regard the “climate change” mantra as a secular religion, and look at EVs solely in engineering terms. I don’t think there should be tax credits or other exemptions for them.
Oh, and I read the study. Here’s the link.
https://www.texaspolicy.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/2023-10-TrueCostofEVs-BennettIsaac.pdf?__hstc=123760149.0b6c4a768d8814345847cae6a32008e7.1693587828998.1698185365265.1698235788581.87&__hssc=123760149.10.1698235788581&__hsfp=2439428725
Here are my criticisms of the study:
The study makes some points I agree with:
Bottom line: The study greatly exaggerates the negatives in terms of cost, and gives short shrift to a major advantage of EVs, which is far less maintenance. No oil changes, no transmission work, no exhaust system replacements. In fact, if EVs do come to rule the roost (this will depend on much longer range batteries, be they the currently-hyped solid state or something else), there will be a huge negative impact on car dealerships, which make a large percentage of their profits on service.
The top-10 car repairs do not exist for EVs. There will still be service needs — tires, suspensions, 12 volt battery replacements, accessories, among others — but nothing even close to what ICEVs require.
Finally: I am not in the EV enthusiast cult, and I laugh at the idea that they somehow matter on the climate front. I think the “climate crisis” is phony. That said, having owned ’em all, once (if) batteries have much farther range and much faster charging times (solid state being the current hype), the driving characteristics are far superior to ICEVs. Anyone with EV experience knows it, apart from any of the irritating virtue-signaling smugness.
Mr. J: You would have been better off with the disclosure first, instead of stupid comments before full disclosure. So we do agree on some things, but mocking someone who spent $80k+ for a car because he spent $2400 running a proper electric line instead of your “extension cord” advice is not persuasive. You need to update your info on EV maintenance- turns out not needing an oil change is not the whole story, an earlier article on Rental Car companies finding the maintenance MORE expensive. You think you know this stuff. Have you read into the physics and chemistry of batteries? No, because you think some”long-range” solution is out there, just like the EV numpties.
I will forget more about this stuff than you’ll ever know. And yes, the guy who spent $2,400 for a home charger is a sucker.
The reason Hertz’s Teslas are more expensive to maintain has nothing to do with their being EVs. It’s because Tesla’s ordinary components are much more expensive. If I were ever to buy an EV for real, it’d never be a Tesla. Hertz’s mistake was picking the wrong car company. If they’d picked Chevy Bolts, things would have been much different.
You know NOTHING about EVs.
I have two vehicles that rotate frequently because I lease them. I also have a 10 year old SUV for when I can’t drive my muscle car and have never changed the exhaust system. I did flush the radiator and change the transmission fluid last year. I change the oil on each vehicle when it tells me to, which is once a year. My maintenance costs are not high at all.
None of the 10 most common car repairs apply to EVs. Read it and weep.
https://www.carmd.com/wp/vehicle-health-index-introduction/2022-carmd-vehicle-health-index/
Mr. J: Typing through the tears of laughter, there is one maintenance item not on your list (no, I haven’t opened your link)- battery replacement. How’s the cost of battery replacement shape up, ICE v. EV?? Go ahead, show how much more you know.
Reading comprehension isn’t exactly your strength, is it bucko? The report at the link cites OBD2 data, and 12V battery replacements don’t go through that port. Maybe you should read the link again, but this time use your finger to follow the lines on the screen.
By the way, my personal experience has been that my EV didn’t need new 12V batteries any more frequently than my ICEVs. Come on, bucko, don’t be such a knee-jerking fool. LOL
Mr. J: Read it again? I told you I didn’t read it, I don’t read links posted by trolls. So much for your reading comprehension, eh? Since you didn’t get my point, I’ll try again- your report is not comparing apples to apples, I don’t even need to read it to know that they have simply noted maintenance items on ICE vehicles that don’t have comparable parts on EV (like oil change, spark plug etc.). What you (and I’m sure your link, again without even looking) don’t address is maintenance on an EV that doesn’t compare to ICE, such as the EV battery.
Now for the finale- you chide people here for spending on chargers, when you are the ultimate sucker- you bought an EV 10 years ago.
His link was for problems when the check engine light goes on. The check engine light is for ICEV emission systems so I doubt his EV would have those issues.
You just showed your ability to look up valuable information. The link you gave is for the 10 most common problems when your check engine light goes on. The check engine light is for the emissions system in an ICEV. I doubt that EVs have a check engine light so that’s probably why they don’t have any of those problems. I think you were banned from those EV sites because you are obnoxious and add nothing to the conversation.
LOL. You don’t know anything about OBD codes either.
I actually worked in the auto industry and designed software for testing vehicles before they left the plant. I’m sure I know more than an immature 12 year old.
Mr. J: You’ll forget more than I’ll ever know about EVs, maybe so. I know that EVs are a pure enviro vanity project, and I know they catch fire with catastrophic results, (do I need to know more?) especially when idiots like you use unsafe electrical practices to charge them, among other matters. You still prattle on below about how Tesla maintenance is more expensive but you can rationalize it because Tesla bad, other EV good. It only proves EV maintenance is more than the EV salesmen admit, but you know all about it. I do know a few things about household electric service and safe practice. You have already proven that you are dangerous in that field.
You know NOTHING about household electric service. Keep trying, bucko. LOL
By the way, I have been blackballed from several EV sites a long time back for stomping all over Tesla’s build quality. This is hardly new for me. Tesla is pretty good at the EV side (batteries, the system), but that took them some years. Their major issue, not yet corrected, is on the rest of their cars. I’ve written about that here a couple times, and a lot more elsewhere.
You couldn’t GIVE me a Tesla, at least if I couldn’t turn right around and sell it and buy an EV from a real car company. Among the real car companies, I’d probably go for GM right now, but I think Toyota will wind up being the winner in the mass market.
Ford’s F-150 Lightning is a joke. They’re taking a bath on those things, and for good reason. No sympathy here for Ford. It’s ironic, because here they pretty much fixed the “Fix Or Repair Daily” stuff on their gas and diesel vehicles, only to fall right back into the quicksand with the Lightning. Friends don’t let friends buy Tesla or Ford EVs.
This destructive nonsense–electric cars–wouldn’t exist if greenies understood that electric = coal, largely, and that every conversion of energy from one form to another involves some loss, so that fossils to miles is more efficient than fossils to electric to battery to miles, especially when electric cars are so heavy. This delusion is carefully maintained by those who make money off it, and by the power elites who use climate hysteria to “control” the population.~~~~~
The delusion is assisted by the fact that we can survive 3 minutes without air, 3 days without water and perhaps 3 months without food. This means that even people who are extremely good at math are unable to calculate that even if all the CO2 on Earth were reduced in living organisms, the atmospheric oxygen would drop by .04%, or from 20%-to-21%, down to 19.96% to 29.96%, which is a change that is not measurable. When I was a schoolchild in the 1960’s, we were told that the Amazon was the lungs of the Earth and similar nonsense. This was before global cooling even, never mind global warming. Today, it means “greens,” and even climate skeptics, are unaware that oxygen is a trivial byproduct of photosynthesis. The real product is sugar, converted to all food for (almost) every living thing on Earth. The ignorance threatens death to EVERY thing.
Electric = coal, it said without realizing that 18% of U.S. electricity generation comes from coal. Here’s a thought: Don’t just make it up. I’ll even help you.
http://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/pdf/sec7_5.pdf
Now: When you look at the facts and see that you were flat wrong, will you admit it here, or will your far-right knee keep right on jerking?
Mr. J: Right after you apologize for telling us EVs = less maintenance cost, which was debunked at this site within the last week. Care to go first?
It wasn’t “debunked” at all.
The IRS standard figure for business expense of a vehicle is 65.5 cents per mile, and most of the vehicles this applies to are powered by gasoline. EPA figures for average MPG of 2020 and 2021 vehicles is 25.4 MPG. This means that the IRS allows effectively on average business deduction of $16.64 per amount of miles driven while burning a gallon of gasoline, no questions asked other than documenting miles driven for business purposes.
This is before determining average gallons per mile of gasoline vehicles, which is more than reciprocal of average MPG. (For a simpler example of this, average MPG of a 30-MPG and a 20-MPG vehicle is 25 MPG and reciprocal of that is .04 GPM, but average GPM of these vehicles .04167.)
Mr. klipstein: Hard to imagine a person saving the planet with an EV is concerned about taxes. /s/
Very fun conversations here about how to charge an electric car. A bunch of commenters here think that they need a “home charging station” costing thousands of dollars, when all they need to do is spend a couple hundred bucks on a 240v charging cord, an extension cord, and an outlet splitter to plug it into the same outlet used by their electric dryer. All of this equipment is readily available on Amazon, or at their local hardware store.
It reminds me in a way of the anthropogenic global warning fraud. You can show those quasi-religious cultists that they’ve got it wrong, but most of them will stick their fingers in their ears and go blah blah blah. They simply <i>want to believe</i>, and when someone <i>wants to believe</i>, they are beyond facts and logic.
Cults, ignorance, and outright stupidity and lies come in lots of permutations. LOL