Electric car real cost comparision

[Trae]

My father forwarded this article that provides food for thought.

Interesting Take on Electric Cars




This is for Engineers out there, surely there should be a rebuttal to this article. Say it isn't true!


As an engineer I love the electric vehicle technology. However, I have been troubled for a longtime by the fact that the electrical energy to keep the batteries charged has to come from the grid and that means more power generation and a huge increase in the distribution infrastructure. Whether generated from coal, gas, oil, wind or sun, installed generation capacity is limited. A friend sent me the following that says it very well. You should all take a look at this short article.

​

INTERESTING - ONE OTHER QUESTION. IF ELECTRIC CARS DO NOT USE GASOLINE, THEY WILL NOT PARTICIPATE IN PAYING A GASOLINE TAX ON EVERY GALLON THAT IS SOLD FOR AUTOMOBILES, WHICH WAS ENACTED SOME YEARS AGO TO HELP TO MAINTAIN OUR ROADS AND BRIDGES. THEY WILL USE THE ROADS, BUT WILL NOT PAY FOR THEIR MAINTENANCE!


In case you were thinking of buying hybrid or an electric car:





Ever since the advent of electric cars, the REAL cost per mile of those things has never been discussed. All you ever heard was the mpg in terms of gasoline, with nary a mention of the cost of electricity to run it . This is the first article I've ever seen and tells the story pretty much as I expected it to





Electricity has to be one of the least efficient ways to power things yet they're being shoved down our throats. Glad somebody finally put engineering and math to paper.





At a neighborhood BBQ I was talking to a neighbor, a BC Hydro executive. I asked him how that renewable thing was doing. He laughed, then got serious. If you really intend to adopt electric vehicles, he pointed out, you had to face certain realities. For example, a home charging system for a Tesla requires 75 amp service. The average house is equipped with 100 amp service. On our small street (approximately 25 homes), the electrical infrastructure would be unable to carry more than three houses with a single Tesla, each. For even half the homes to have electric vehicles, the system would be wildly over-loaded.


This is the elephant in the room with electric vehicles. Our residential infrastructure cannot bear the load. So as our genius elected officials promote this nonsense, not only are we being urged to buy these things and replace our reliable, cheap generating systems with expensive, new windmills and solar cells, but we will also have to renovate our entire delivery system! This latter "investment" will not be revealed until we're so far down this dead end road that it will be presented with an 'OOPS...!' and a shrug.





If you want to argue with a green person over cars that are eco-friendly, just read the following. Note: If you ARE a green person, read it anyway. It's enlightening.


Eric test drove the Chevy Volt at the invitation of General Motors and he writes, "For four days in a row, the fully charged battery lasted only 25 miles before the Volt switched to the reserve gasoline engine ." Eric calculated the car got 30 mpg including the 25 miles it ran on the battery. So, the range including the 9-gallon gas tank and the 16 kwh battery is approximately 270 miles.





It will take you 4.5 hours to drive 270 miles at 60 mph. Then add 10 hours to charge the battery and you have a total trip time of 14.5 hours. In a typical road trip your average speed (including charging time) would be 20 mph.


According to General Motors, the Volt battery holds 16 kwh of electricity. It takes a full 10 hours to charge a drained battery. The cost for the electricity to charge the Volt is never mentioned , so I looked up what I pay for electricity. I pay approximately (it varies with amount used and the seasons) $1.16 per kwh. 16 kwh x $1.16 per kwh = $18.56 to charge the battery. $18.56 per charge divided by 25 miles = $0.74 per mile to operate the Volt using the battery. Compare this to a similar size car with a gasoline engine that gets only 32 mpg. $3.19 per gallon divided by 32 mpg = $0.10 per mile.





The gasoline powered car costs about $20,000 while the Volt costs $46,000-plus. So the American Government wants loyal Americans not to do the math, but simply pay three times as much for a car, that costs more than seven times as much to run, and takes three times longer to drive across the country.

 

[TerryA]

Well said Trae,

Most of the Green people don’t want you to know the real costs of these vehicles. I would compare it to purchasing a diesel car in California. The $10K+ premium for the car and diesel fuel is higher than premium gasoline at about $3.70 galllon here. Purchasing a diesel car is trendy but you won’t break even until you hit about 250K miles. Kinda stupid isn’t it?

I feel the same way about converting my home to solar. Solar built into a new home I think would probably pencil out for a young couple purchasing a new home but I own my home and at my age it is IMOP a ridiculous proposition. These solar sales people who pester us daily with phone calls all promote your monthly electric bill to be less but the system’s cost about $10K is amortized over time. Personally I would rather just pay my regular electric bill as I go forward. I will never make up the cost of solar in what’s left of my life.

Anyway more people should be talking about the true costs of this conversion to electric vs gas or solar.

BTW, Tesla is only surviving because of government subsidies. The company is actually upside down and losing money.

 

[alabbasi]

The nice thing about diesels is that you can buy a 1977 Mercedes Benz 240D with 250,000 miles and drive it another 250,000 miles at 30MPG. Cost of entry is about $1000.
I'm not sure that the same thing will ever be said about a electric motors but I could be wrong.

 

[atg]

My father forwarded this article that provides food for thought.

Interesting Take on Electric Cars

While I agree all costs should be factored in when considering both electric cars and solar, the facts stated with respect to charging the electric car are simply wrong. Not only that, but they are exaggerated wildly. And I have seen this misleading figure posted elsewhere, which leads me to believe there is someone promoting it.

The most expensive electricity in the nation is Hawaii at 26 cents per kwh. Louisiana was 7 cents in 2017. Average is 12.9. Source for this Information is: https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/index.php?page=electricity_factors_affecting_prices

If you apply this figure to the battery capacity, the cost to charge the volt becomes a rather more palatable $2 or so.

The road tax thing is a real issue of course. States will have to find a way to tax the EVs like all the other cars. It would be nice if they would actually maintain the roads and bridges in return, however.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[Ntrepid]

Don’t forget that the upkeep of the roads are also being paid for in that same per mile cost in the gas car.


Robert

 

[Jlaa]

This diatribe looks at the long game and assumes that electric vs gasoline powered cars are an either/or proposition.

Living in the self-proclaimed-ostentatiously-greenie-but-not-really capital of the States, SF, I observe my surroundings with the following notes:

• Electric cars are an AND proposition. Everyone I know with a Palo-Alto-Camry (Tesla) or Leaf or a Bolt owns multiple cars. Many of those cars may be gas guzzling conventional cars. But they use the electric car to tool around local roads. Or get in the HOV (carpool lane).
• Outside of one couple I know who has a Leaf (and they are obnoxious - they are a living stereotype --- they are vegans, wash their clothes by hand with their self-manufactured soap, and raise chickens) as their sole means of owned vehicular transport, everyone else I know with an electric car (which is probably like 40% of my social circle --- a lot!) has other gasoline powered cars.
• People buy these things because (1) they like the prestige (keeping up with the Joneses) of a PA Camry, (2) it feels "good" to not to have to go to a gas station, (3) you get to park in the front of the mall/store parking lot where all the chargers are, etc .... it just "feels good." That's all. No one really truly cares, outside the above aforementioned couple, about the green argument. You buy the Tesla 'cos you already have the phone that unlocks with your face, Alexa is in every room of your house, you have Ring installed at your doorbell, you set your temperature with Nest, you have a glow forge 3D printer for Junior, you work out in your carefully curated living room with exquisite DWR furniture, and on the pair of Pelotons you bought so that you can virtually take spin glasses while you drink Blue Bottle Coffee delivered to you by uber eats ---- you need the next "status hit"!
• If you can plunk down 80-120K on a Model S original PA Camry (or even if you're a pauper and bought a 60K Model 3), you can probably slap solar on your roof and drive down operating costs. Slapping solar on your roof is also a "feel good" item --- 15-20K, get a 7-15 KwHr system on your roof ---- in the grand scheme of things, its not that expensive and you get to "feel good" for a long time by having no electricity bill.

 

[gsxr]

While I agree all costs should be factored in when considering both electric cars and solar, the facts stated with respect to charging the electric car are simply wrong. Not only that, but they are exaggerated wildly. And I have seen this misleading figure posted elsewhere, which leads me to believe there is someone promoting it.

The most expensive electricity in the nation is Hawaii at 26 cents per kwh. Louisiana was 7 cents in 2017. Average is 12.9. Source for this Information is: https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/index.php?page=electricity_factors_affecting_prices

If you apply this figure to the battery capacity, the cost to charge the volt becomes a rather more palatable $2 or so.

atg beat me to it. I think the author misread, or misunderstood, their electric rates. Nowhere in the USA would anyone pay $1.16 per kwh. Most likely it would be $0.116 per kwh, making the cost $1.86 to charge, not $18.56.

Granted, some areas have tiered price structures, and if your usage hits the highest tier it can be substantially more. I had family living near Sacramento, CA with PG&E electric, known for insane rates. Over the five (5!) tiers, it started somewhere around $0.11/kwh at the lowest tier, and peaked around $0.36/kwh at the highest tier. If charging your car at home often, in a location like this, I could easily see a good portion of the electric bill hitting that highest tier. Still, even at ~$0.36/kwh that would make the cost ~$6/charge, not $18+. And, I believe that area with PG&E is one of the highest in the USA. Where I live, the lowest tier is ~$0.08 and the highest is ~$0.12, for the higher rates in summer.

But I digress. Overall, I understand the concerns mentioned in the article... existing residential infrastructure may not be able to handle large numbers of electric cars, and then you have the whole road tax issue. Not to mention that in general, electric cars don't eliminate pollution - they relocate the pollution / emissions to a different area (where the power is being generated). Definitely a can o' worms.

 

[Trae]

Thanks for correcting the electric rate. When one slides the decimal point one position left, it Looks like $18.56 per charge divided by 25 miles = $0.74 per mile to operate the Volt using the battery would change to $1.856 per charge divided by 25 miles = $.075 per mile.
vs. a gasoline engine that gets only 32 mpg. $3.19 per gallon divided by 32 mpg = $0.10 per mile.
Is that a better comparison? The electric car wins by 2.5 cents per mile!!!

Bummer, Always looking for any info that justifies keeping all my gas guzzlers on the road.

On a related topic, Japan and China are having a heck of a time disposing of solar panels that were supposed to "help" the environment, but are toxic to the land. They don't know what to do with all the aging panels.

 

[Jlaa]

Btw - the fast chargers are typically 240V 40amp devices, which require a 50 amp circuit..... not 75 amps. Also, are most houses employing only 100amp panels? Really? My guess is more. My own house was built in 1974 and has 150 amp service. Ive worked on 50s era houses that have 60 amp service though.

 

[gsxr]

Btw - the fast chargers are typically 240V 40amp devices, which require a 50 amp circuit..... not 75 amps. Also, are most houses employing only 100amp panels? Really? My guess is more. My own house was built in 1974 and has 150 amp service. Ive worked on 50s era houses that have 60 amp service though.

Service size is HIGHLY dependent on the age and size of the house, and if it has electric heat and/or hot water heaters. It's not uncommon for smaller homes (say. ~1500 sq ft) to have 100A services, even if they are only 10-20 years old. It's a cost-saving thing most of the time, the contractor pockets more $$$ by not installing anything larger than necessary. 200A services are more common on larger homes, and/or if it has electric heat. It's rare to see anything larger than 200A on a single-family dwelling unless it's yuge (say, 4000+ sq ft).

As an example, my previous 1500 sq ft home had a 100A service, with a separate 100A service + meter for the detached shop. My current 1800 sq ft home has a single feed to the meter that supports 200A, with a 100A panel in the house, and a separate 100A panel in the detached shop, with a single meter.

The cost for panels / service cable is incremental between 100A and 200A, so if you are building anything... spend the extra couple bucks and install 200A service, with the largest panel available. That means 40 full-width circuit breaker spaces on a 200A panel... don't go cheap on the panel either.

Disclaimer: In a former life I was an electricy guy, so I almost know what I'm talking about.

 

[Sam SL]

That report is full of holes. That's my .02 worth.

 

[imdbui]

I'm gonna chime in because we have two EVs. A Fiat 500e and a Tesla Model X. We also have diesel and gasoline cars/trucks. I agree with much of what Jlaa said. Most people don't drive these to be green, other than Leaf owners, because those are pretty crappy and don't know why anyone would buy it for convenience or tech, so it must be for the planet ��

The claim of 75a requirement is exaggerated. I installed a 240v outlet that with a 50amp breaker. Our charger draws 32amp max. Almost every third party charger does 30-32amp. Tesla used to offer a 72amp charger as an option, but no longer. The new Model 3's come with 32amp chargers.

In my area (PNW) I charge the EVs at a rate of $.04/kwh using PGE Time-Based usage, I charge between 10pm-6am when grid demand is off-peak. Most of our power is hydro or wind, unlike other parts that may use coal.

Overall, the Model X is my go-to. Now that's all personal preference. And I'd be happy to sip and chat with anyone about all the reasons, but won't bring it up here. I will add that many (if not most) Tesla owner's personalities really annoy me, I don't even visit Tesla forums anymore. Too many doochbags ��

I do think EVs are the future of personal vehicular transportation. But our infrastructure is not ready nor does it want to adopt EVs. Articles like these are obviously pushing an agenda, it happens on both sides. Critical thinking required.

 

[Trae]

Agreed, the article does push an agenda. I published it here because it looked to support my agenda of driving old V8s.

EVs may be the future, but I am clinging to the MBs of the past.

 

[Jlaa]

Agreed, the article does push an agenda. I published it here because it looked to support my agenda of driving old V8s.

EVs may be the future, but I am clinging to the MBs of the past.

I look at electrics as as a way for me to keep enjoying the old stuff on a nice weekend. When my prius dies (and man, that thing gets abused every day with virtually no maintenance outside oil changes and just refuses to die) I’m gonna get either a Chevy Bolt or an ugly ass Hyundai Kona EV or whatever Hideously ugly EV has 250+ mile range and is cheap as chips ... as long as the manufacturer is still under the limit for the consumer to qualify for the fed 7500 tax credit ... and just drive and neglect that thing too and run it into the ground.

My beaters of choice in decades past were used Tercels and used Volvo 240s/940s.

 

[LWB250]

Service size is HIGHLY dependent on the age and size of the house, and if it has electric heat and/or hot water heaters. It's not uncommon for smaller homes (say. ~1500 sq ft) to have 100A services, even if they are only 10-20 years old. It's a cost-saving thing most of the time, the contractor pockets more $$$ by not installing anything larger than necessary. 200A services are more common on larger homes, and/or if it has electric heat. It's rare to see anything larger than 200A on a single-family dwelling unless it's yuge (say, 4000+ sq ft).

As an example, my previous 1500 sq ft home had a 100A service, with a separate 100A service + meter for the detached shop. My current 1800 sq ft home has a single feed to the meter that supports 200A, with a 100A panel in the house, and a separate 100A panel in the detached shop, with a single meter.

The cost for panels / service cable is incremental between 100A and 200A, so if you are building anything... spend the extra couple bucks and install 200A service, with the largest panel available. That means 40 full-width circuit breaker spaces on a 200A panel... don't go cheap on the panel either.

Disclaimer: In a former life I was an electricy guy, so I almost know what I'm talking about.

As a former "electric guy" who dealt with both consumer and commercial/industrial distribution systems, I would agree that some of this article appears to have an agenda behind it.

That being said, I also have reservations about EVs for the reasons stated - the electricity has to come from somewhere, and where I live that's either coal or natural gas.

I had a Ford hybrid rental car for a few weeks when my 1994 S420 got totaled, and I was pleasantly surprised with not only the performance but the economy. It seemed to be the best balance between an EV and a gas/diesel car. It think this is the direction to go, as it makes the most sense and doesn't leave you tied to a single source of fuel, sort of. It augments a gas burner, making the car as a whole far more economical.

When it comes to electrical services, in this part of the world due to things like large AC units, a 200 amp service is pretty common. When I had a 4,000 SF behemoth of a house I had a 400 amp service split between two panels. That allowed me to break out critical loads for my standby generator, and use a smaller automatic transfer switch, too. No need to worry when you needed juice in that place....

Dan

 

[ace10]

Distribution is a huge problem.
In my area, the scenic views one would expect if one lived in the "country" are being disfigured by mega power lines being erected to feed a growing housing market and the insatiable development of massive data centers.
Dominion won't bury the lines. So future generations will get to live in the shadows of these monster towers and enjoy all the associated health benefits.

My wife DD's a plug-in hybrid Porsche. Bought it for the HOV plates. It will be replaced by the Taycan during that platform's second model year.
I have (2) 400A services (single phase, grrrrrr) on my property. But our average usage ~1600kwh/month total. And that includes charging the car every day. This usage will obviously change a bit when we move to an EV.

At my old townhouse, we had 150A service. Everything was electric. Hot water, cooking, HVAC. No chance in heck of adding an EV charger to that house. Or any of the 1000s just like in locally, or millions across the country.

Electric automobile transit isn't a panacea. Not even close.

They will have to pry the keys to my ICE cars out of my cold, stiff fingers.

 

[Jlaa]

Distribution is a huge problem.

At my old townhouse, we had 150A service. Everything was electric. Hot water, cooking, HVAC. No chance in heck of adding an EV charger to that house. Or any of the 1000s just like in locally, or millions across the country.

'

Naiive question on my part --- why? In your old townhome, could you not have just paid the local utility to $75 or whatever to upgrade your feed from 150amp to something greater, and then gotten an electrician to replace the main panel?

 

[Jlaa]

When it comes to electrical services, in this part of the world due to things like large AC units, a 200 amp service is pretty common. When I had a 4,000 SF behemoth of a house I had a 400 amp service split between two panels. That allowed me to break out critical loads for my standby generator, and use a smaller automatic transfer switch, too. No need to worry when you needed juice in that place....

Dan

So interesting to see the disparate nature of homes here in the States! I have a 3300 sq ft house, but because we live in a mediterranean climate, I do not have (nor need) air conditioning. Heat is by natural gas. Hot water is also natural gas (actually hydronic heat, so the same boiler provides for domestic hot water AND hydronic heat --- I love this heating system more than anything but that's a diff topic so I digress....).

Cooking is two 220V ovens, a 220V 40 amp cooktop, and 1 natural gas burner. Dryer is natural gas. We have a 150amp electrical panel. At "idle", our house consumes around 850 watts. I haven't looked at what we consume at full tilt boogie, but I converted most of the lighting to LED a while ago, so the big consumers of electricity are cooking and that's about it.

 

[ace10]

'

Naiive question on my part --- why? In your old townhome, could you not have just paid the local utility to $75 or whatever to upgrade your feed from 150amp to something greater, and then gotten an electrician to replace the main panel?

Haven't lived there in 20 yrs, but the electrical service entrance was buried. If the builder cheaped out (highly likely) and used the minimum size cabling, then the service might need to be dug up. Concrete, pavement, landscaping...who knows what else. An upsized ervice panel wouldn't be a big cost, but it adds up.

And then you've got the utility with transmission and generation constraints. If EVERYBODY went out and bought an EV tomorrow, there'd be a pretty big problem.

 

[atg]

This diatribe looks at the long game and assumes that electric vs gasoline powered cars are an either/or proposition.

Living in the self-proclaimed-ostentatiously-greenie-but-not-really capital of the States, SF, I observe my surroundings with the following notes:
(snip)

I drove the x before leasing a new x5d for my wife.

I pretty much buy cars by the pound. It's a physics thing relating to how the acceleration is shared between objects of differing masses in an elastic collision. Basically, I want to accelerate less than the other guy.

Anyway we had an old g55 for awhile and that thing had so much torque it was obscene. But it rode pretty hard so She never drove it.

The x5d now has about 8500 miles on. It has eaten two high pressure fuel pumps...so far. A week in the shop each time, and one of us standing by the side of the road. Lovely to drive, but failing to meet my one non-negotiable: a car has to go when you turn the key. I will say the 85 300td has never left me by the roadside once in the past 18 years I have owned it. Next time the pump fails will be the last time any of us climb into the x5.

But the point of this rambling post is actually performance related. I never cared about mileage before, and I still dont care, but a model x will peel your ears off your head practically when you hit the accelerator, is very quiet, and is very heavy. It is also very nice to never use the brakes ever, because the regen is programmable, so you just let off and it slows to walking speed however fast you want it to, using only the motor. The thing never shifts gears. It is like magic.

Sure it outsources the pollution to some far away generator plant or unslightly windmill or coal strip mine. And all my favorite $15 spicy rainbow roll sushi at whole foods has mercury in it from the ash fallout (Maybe it will react with all the lead paint in my lungs from sanding that 55 oldsmobile when I was 24). I'm sure lithium mines arent terribly healthy or beautiful either. But as the sticker says: save the world - kill yourself. Didn't none of us ask to be born I reckon. There's things a guy can control, and things a guy caint.

As for the grid, maybe things will get so distributed with all this rooftop solar that it wont matter much. As many of you are no doubt aware, we pay Arizona to shut down its power plants and use our excess solar on sunny days already. Maybe some electric car chargers can help to use the electricity locally.

I think what the power guys fear is that the price per kwh is going to go down even as the infrastructure costs rise due to distributed power generation and variable demand complicating everything. That dog just wont hunt. But maybe we are overdue for some modernization of the grid. I never heard so much pissing and moaning about massive Infrastructure employment projects from a bunch of v8 driving men in my life. Country was built on this kind of shit. Next we'll be talking about how Europe's grid cant possibly handle the load from all those electric trains hauling Italian trucks over the pass into Switzerland and lighting entire towns as they regen down the back side.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[TerryA]

I may be nieve about EVs but my only thought is unless you want to save the world yourself. I see no justification for spending $80K to $120K for a Tesla or even $40K for a Volt just to save gas. My beater is a used 2015 KIA Optima 12,800 miles, 100K ten yr warranty $17K tax license registration ‘Out the Door’ It Avgs 27mpg all day long. Strictly hwy 36+mpg.

My point being I saved about $23K (maybe less whatever?) by not buying a Volt. I can drive the KIA till the wheels fall on the $23K savings, spending it over a long period of time.

IMOP, unless your really a ‘Green Freak’ why in the hell would you buy a Tesla? Is it prestige or what?

OK, Go ahead and ‘Shoot Holes in my Theory’

 

[nocfn]

I saw cows protesting almond milk factories, pesticide companies too

 

[ace10]

...

IMOP, unless your really a ‘Green Freak’ why in the hell would you buy a Tesla? Is it prestige or what?
...

I flunked out of the Tesla indoctrination process back in 2014, so we didn't get one.

But HOV plates can save 5-15 minutes of commute time each way. Every day.

That's a huge incentive which cannot be measured in dollars and cents. I worked with the folks at VA DMV & DEQ to get the car we were interested in (Panamera plug in) added to the authorized list of eligible vehicles for HOV plates. It didn't meet the criteria in the strict sense, but we eventually got it approved.

The car has incurred depreciation like no other that I have owned. But the Boss likes it, and it reduces the commute stress a bit.

 

[Jlaa]

My beater is a used 2015 KIA Optima 12,800 miles, 100K ten yr warranty $17K tax license registration ‘Out the Door’ It Avgs 27mpg all day long. Strictly hwy 36+mpg.
My point being I saved about $23K (maybe less whatever?) by not buying a Volt. I can drive the KIA till the wheels fall on the $23K savings, spending it over a long period of time.

TerryA, you are my hero. Cheap is good.
BTW - low miles used Prii are an even better deal (fantastic mileage) but I also recognize that folks from Orange County have their limits....

 

[Jlaa]

But HOV plates can save 5-15 minutes of commute time each way. Every day.

That's a huge incentive which cannot be measured in dollars and cents.

I understand your point and it is well taken - the additional 10-30 min per day of direct increased productivity is worth a lot! I would opine though that is indeed possible to measure that, however, in dollars and cents. But, perhaps, if not an apples to apples measurement, it would be an apples to pears measurement.

if your commute is, say, a 60 minute one way commute, you could hire a driver and supply him/her with a car. Whatever that $$$ costs to gain 120 mins per day in increased productivity would be the measurement. A slightly more economical approach would to replace the driver with lyft/uber.

the only hitch is that this approach replaces the whole commute - not an incremental amount as with the HOV lane approach.

 

[gsxr]

if your commute is, say, a 60 minute one way commute, you could hire a driver and supply him/her with a car. Whatever that $$$ costs to gain 120 mins per day in increased productivity would be the measurement. A slightly more economical approach would to replace the driver with lyft/uber..

A lot of the above makes a good case for telework / telecommuting. This had been on the rise for some time, and then Yahoo decided to nearly ban it, then Meggy Whitman jumped on that bandwagon at the old HP back in 2013... and other Bay area companies did the same. HP called it the "Back to the Office" initiative. The original Hewlett-Packard Company divorced in 2015 into HP, Inc and Hewlett-Packard Enterprise; two entirely different / separate entities. H-Pink quietly allows limited telework now, while Enterprise is still monitoring badge swipes and doing desk checks to make sure employees aren't working from home.

But anyway, telework alone can make a significant difference in traffic loads on undersized infrastructure, not to mention reducing vehicle emissions. Not everyone can work from home, but if more employers would embrace the concept, it would help.

</soapbox>

 

[ace10]

I understand your point and it is well taken - the additional 10-30 min per day of direct increased productivity is worth a lot! I would opine though that is indeed possible to measure that, however, in dollars and cents. But, perhaps, if not an apples to apples measurement, it would be an apples to pears measurement.

if your commute is, say, a 60 minute one way commute, you could hire a driver and supply him/her with a car. Whatever that $$$ costs to gain 120 mins per day in increased productivity would be the measurement. A slightly more economical approach would to replace the driver with lyft/uber.
the only hitch is that this approach replaces the whole commute - not an incremental amount as with the HOV lane approach.

It's interesting that you would take the 10-30 minutes of "free" time and invest them into work/professional productivity. That's definitely not the case here. She is trying to claw back some time for personal pursuits. This is a 45 mile commute taking 75-120 minutes one way.

Uber is simply not practical given the distance and the dearth of uber drivers out here. Especially at 6AM. We live out in the country.

There is a commuter bus service which departs only a few miles from our home, and that serves as a proxy for your hired driver solution. She uses that service as often as practical, however the schedules are aligned more for the "government" worker-type work day (short and of fixed duration).


+++++++++++++++++++


And to gsxr's point... my wife's company is a subsidiary of NYC-based media company. There is absolutely no appetite for remote work. Even on an infrequent basis.

 

[LWB250]

'

Naiive question on my part --- why? In your old townhome, could you not have just paid the local utility to $75 or whatever to upgrade your feed from 150amp to something greater, and then gotten an electrician to replace the main panel?

Generally, most utilities won’t ding you for a service upgrade, since it means more potential revenue for them. That and their incoming feed will only be limited by the size of the conductors, which are probably rated for a higher amperage than the service you currently have. However, making a significant change is service entrance ampacity can be a rather expensive undertaking, as in a lot of municipalities it can bring the whole structure into scope. That means upgrading devices, branch circuits, etc.

Breakers are sized to protect the downstream conductors. I could have 1,000 amp feed to your house, but a 200 amp main breaker with appropriately sized wiring downstream from it. Of course, I would have a circuit interrupter on my pole rated for 1,000 amps....

Dan

 

[gsxr]

What Dan said. Upgrading the service capacity is straightforward, but can be prohibitively expensive, depending on if you have above-ground or underground feed to the meter, and the distance. And, unless you can DIY the panel upgrade (not recommended unless you REALLY know what you are doing!), that is also a major undertaking. A top-shelf wire stretcher comes in handy too. (<-- Electrician humor.)

 

[Glen]

Why do people buy electric cars?
Why does anyone buy a new car? In the long run, it's almost always more economical to repair the one you already own.

 

[LWB250]

What Dan said. Upgrading the service capacity is straightforward, but can be prohibitively expensive, depending on if you have above-ground or underground feed to the meter, and the distance. And, unless you can DIY the panel upgrade (not recommended unless you REALLY know what you are doing!), that is also a major undertaking. A top-shelf wire stretcher comes in handy too. (<-- Electrician humor.)

One of the things I’ve looked for when searching for a house - underground utilities. From the closest substation (part of a loop feeder, too) to my house is 100% underground. As a result, we rarely, if ever, experience outages even in the worst weather.

Always helps to have plenty of goose grease or duck grunt around when stretching wires. That and a box full of apprentice plugs....

Dan

 

[samiam44]

Always wondered what the total impact is... maybe memory is old- but isn't electric transmission line loss like 80%? What's the huge electric plant down the street spewing out to give you that "clean electricity" ?

 

[gsxr]

Always wondered what the total impact is... maybe memory is old- but isn't electric transmission line loss like 80%?

Looks like typical line loss for high-voltage transmission is in single digits:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_power_transmission#Losses

 

[RicardoD]

EDIT Work rant deleted

my name is Ricardo and I remove and replace car parts on weekends for fun

 

[nocfn]

I never got to see the rant, DADGUMMIT

 

[gerryvz]

Why do people buy electric cars?
Why does anyone buy a new car? In the long run, it's almost always more economical to repair the one you already own.

Glen is 100% right. Existing cars -- even inefficient by today's standards cars such as my G-wagen or 560SEC -- are already environmentally bought and paid-for, and thus are more "green" than any new car, which requires resources to both manufacture and then consume during its operational life, and then to dispose of after its life is over (and we all know that today's vehicles, even MBs, are disposable compared to those of the past).

I have been railing on this topic for well over a decade, because of a few reasons:

1) These hybrid and electric vehicles are solely and very falsely marketed to peoples' emotions..... to make them feel better about themselves and what good they are [supposedly] doing for the environment; to show off and wear their "green-ness" on their sleeves to impress other people; and using very incomplete data that is designed to lead gullible Americans to entirely wrong conclusions.

2) To my last point above, most people are not informed enough to actually look at the BIG picture, and instead are herded by the car manufacturers and the government into looking at solely the operational mileage/efficiency of the vehicle during its service life.

3) When one looks at the big picture, i.e. the FULL CRADLE TO GRAVE LIFE CYCLE of these vehicles, it very quickly becomes apparent that these "green" vehicles are far worse for the environment than the supposedly polluting inefficient vehicles they are being marketed to replace. Cradle-to-grave life cycle entails:

a) the resources and environmental impact of the raw materials sourced to manufacture the vehicle
b) the energy required to manufacture the vehicle
c) the resources consumed during the vehicle's operational life
d) the resources required to maintain the vehicle during its operational life
e) the resources and environmental impact of the vehicle's de-commissioning, dismantling and disposal
f) the long-term environmental impact of the vehicle's raw materials decomposition

A couple of examples:

1) the raw materials required to create the batteries of these green vehicles are extremely poisonous to the environment, both in their acquisition and eventual disposal
2) the energy required to manufacture these green vehicles is an order of magnitude or higher than that required to manufacture non-green vehicles -- one example of this is that aluminum panel manufacturing requires triple or quadruple the amount of electricity and water as does steel panel manufacturing
3) you realize that the operational life of the vehicle is only a fraction of the vehicle's overall life and environmental impact.
4) The electricity required to power plug-in electric vehicles is generated, typically, through traditional "polluting" means such as nuclear, coal or natural gas plants. Very very very little of the US energy supply is obtained through wind and solar means.

When you honestly and objectively delve into these "green" vehicles -- whether hybrid or totally electric -- you will quickly see what an utter farce these cars are. The 50 MPG that a Toyota Prius gets over its 100-150K mile lifetime, which is about 4x what my 560SEC gets, is a completely moot point given the incremental resources that went into the manufacturing and will go into the disposal of the Prius during its life. Yet the 560SEC will likely see 2-3x the mileage during its lifetime that the Prius will, more than amortizing the SEC's efficiency.

Yet ordinary, shallow-thinking Americans (and these tend to be folks of a certain mindset/political ilk, who tend to live in the Coastal areas of the USA), whom I would generally consider to be "low-info" people (borrowing this derogatory term from certain political circles) when it comes to environmental and automotive issues, have been COMPLETELY bamboozled by the car-makers' marketing and government incentives into thinking that these "green" vehicles are really superior and are excellent for the environment. And these same people, who love government regulation and government programs, think that because the government encourages the use of green vehicles, that they must be inherently good, just and the correct path forward.

Somewhere I have on my computer a document from some years ago that provides a very objective, non-political, academic cradle-to-grave analysis of hybrid vehicles. I've supplied this to more than a few people over the years, and for those green-car lovers, it has WIDELY opened more than a few folks' eyes as to how they were being misled by the "conventional wisdom" of the green lobby and the US government. If I can find it, I'll post it.

Just be careful out there. Don't believe the hype. Do your homework, and get informed. You'll be shocked at the mis-information and marketing memes that are designed to manipulate through playing to your emotions and sense of wanting to "do good" and "do your part" for the environment. It's not all true.

Cheers,
Gerry

 

[Glen]

Still, there is a time and place to buy a new or newer car...lifestyles and needs/wants change. It's just that people often base their decisions on false notions. For myself, I plan to buy an all electric car within the next couple years for three reasons.
1. convenience
2. performance
3. short trip efficiency vs. an ICE car...why fire up a V8 to drive to the store 2 minutes away?

 

[RicardoD]

I know several guys, car types, then couldn't resist leasing a 1st gen Nissan Leaf, for daily work commute and ending spending less than per month than filling their V8 performance cars with gas for the same purpose. Electric cars are great but agree with Gerry that you have to make the purchase for the right reasons and not just because you think its better overall for the environment. Reasons being you want car pool lane access, less maintenance, or just a total lower cost commute in a specific situation.

 

[gerryvz]

3. short trip efficiency vs. an ICE car...why fire up a V8 to drive to the store 2 minutes away?

For short-trip efficiency, for example to go get a gallon of milk or run to the post office, I use either my two legs, or my motorcycle. Indeed, why fire up a V-8 (not to mention drive for two minutes) if you're not going to enjoy the trip ... i.e. taking the long way there and back.

 

[Maui]

I looked very seriously at the Tesla Model S and tehn at the Model 3. I test drove both and they were fantastic. I wanted an electric witha range of at least 300 miles. The fly in the ointment came when I set up a spread sheet and looked at the real dollars for purchase and onwership. Our current DD is a 2011 E550. It averages 26 mpg on the freeway which is where most of its miles have come from. We drive from Portland to Puget Sound on a regular basis. I own this car outright and love it. The Model S would run about $85k to purchase and would require interupting our trips with one quick charge in order to have some juice left in the tank when we arrived at our destination.

I figure my E550 is worth about $20k if sold outright and costs about $2500 in gas per year. The Model S would receive free supercharging when available and would require installing a charger at a cost of about $5k. The cost to charge at home would be about $20 per charge or about $1000 per year. So, I could purchase the Model S for $84k and install a charger for another $5k. If purchased soon I would qualify for the $7.5 tax credit leaving a first year cost of about $82.5k or I could keep my beloved E550 and have the cash to purchase a lot of gasoline.

I just could not get the Tesla to even come close to actually saving any coin.

 

[Ntrepid]

I did the same thing out of interest when Tesla came out with their calculator. I wanted to see how much the Model S would "save" me. In their questionnaire, Tesla asked me how far I drove to work, the MPG I averaged, and the cost of a gallon of gas.

They then went further to ask how many times I stopped at the gas station, how many minutes I spent filling up, and what my annual salary was.

Their intent was to calculate how much money their car saved me not only on the consumption of gas but also the time spent filling up the tank which of course they thought would be accomplished at home while I was sleeping (and not sitting at one of their stations in the Supercharger network).

At the time, I spent $400 in gas a month on my 2000 ML55 and the commensurate cost of electricity was $50 in that same time period. So Tesla was going to save me at least $350 in fuel costs (as I disregarded the time savings). However, I have owned my ML55 since February of 2001 so I would be assuming a $1200/month car note and paying $50/month for fuel.

In the end, I chose to save myself $850/month and continue driving my car with (now) 185Kmi.

BTW, I have to chuckle at the people who put bumper stickers on their electric cars proclaiming zero emissions. In VA where I live, the majority of energy is from coal (not so clean). It has made me want to print stickers from the same material used on cars which are illegally parked and impossible to remove from windows as a rebuttal saying "Zero tailpipe but incredibly bad emissions from my power source" or "No pollution but awesome nuclear waste from my power source."


Robert

 

[Glen]

My interest in an electric car is not to save money. I like the idea of being able to charge at home (yes, I have a PV system), saving time by not having to do routine maintenance, eg. fluid and brake changes, and great acceleration.

I've been using rechargeable lawn equipment for several years now and will never go back to gas powered mowers, blowers, and trimmers. The cordless stuff is so much easier to live with. Similarly, I've been buying more and more cordless power tools too...way more convenient than corded versions and just as, if not more powerful too.

 

[Jlaa]

All facinating observations. I love electric cars’ instant torque and HOV lane access. I have no doubt that they do not really save any $$$ at all. I might buy a Hyundai Kona EV or Chevy Bolt as a beater, but “too much software-itis” worries me. Too much “cloud access” and “Internet of Things” worries me. Particularly Tesla. I have zero desire to own a car where people are talking about getting root access to it.

It is just a matter of time until someone exploits some vulnerability on the software and does a zero day exploit. No.

https://mobile.twitter.com/atomicthumbs/status/1032939617404645376?s=19

 

[Stevester 500E]

My interest in an electric car would be if they truly were green, the instant torque, hopefully less required maintenance, and if their range were at least 600 miles.

 

[LWB250]

Again, I had a Ford Fusion hybrid for a rental that lasted about three weeks, so I was pretty comfortable with the car. It had the goofy start/stop engine feature that was really unsettling at first.

During that time I probably drove about 600 miles, if that, and if I recall correctly I only put about 1-1/2 tanks of regular unleaded in it, which I believe was about 15 gallons of fuel. I drove it based on the feedback "leafs" that you get for not driving with a lead foot. I was suitably impressed with it for a basic commuter car, and for grins just looked around at local dealers for floor models that were going in the mid to upper teens. Not a bad compromise, and a very economical car to operate and drive.

My commute is roughly 40 miles round trip daily, half of which is highway, the other half surface streets. If I could find an EV that could do this reliably and for the comparable cost of a gasoline powered car I would seriously consider it if I was going to buy a new car. I've yet to find an EV that could do this for the same cost, even just considering acquisition costs, not "hidden" costs.

Dan

 

[gerryvz]

One other thing I forgot to mention in my post above: if fuel efficiency is the primary motivation for an electric or hybrid car, the technology to provide very tractable, highly fuel efficient cars has been around for many decades -- without all of the added cost and complexity of the hybrid and electrical systems, along with their environmental impact. It's called a highly efficient internal combustion engine.

The primary example of this that I can think of is the Honda Civic VX, which debuted with the new-generation Honda Civic body in 1992. This was a high-mileage optimized model of the Civic, and SOLELY with a 1.5-liter internal combustion engine with 92 HP, it achieved 48/55 MPG city/highway with manual transmission. Toyota also had similar models. No hybrid or battery crap needed. The car had a reduced (8-gallon) fuel tank from the normal Civic's 10-gallon tank.

Further development and optimization of the internal combustion engine could likely have ratcheted this efficiency up another 30-50%, but development pretty much stopped as the price of fuel became cheaper again.

In any case, I wanted to point out that "conventional" technology has been more than adequate to cover fuel efficiency issues for many decades, before all of this hybrid/electric crap came about. People forget that the internal combustion engine is not a bad thing, and if further R&D were done could be made even better.

As a side note, it is interesting to see that Diesel engines have fallen dramatically in recent years in terms of overall sales in Europe. Only a few years ago, Diesels were around 60% of all cars sold in Europe. It's a fraction of that total now, as Diesels have fallen out of favor. Part of this is due to the Volkswagen Group scandal with Diesel emissions, but it can't be totally blamed for the situation. Despite their efficiency over gasoline engines, Diesel engines pollute more and are IMHO not the answer.

Cheers,
Gerry

 

[gsxr]

... It had the goofy start/stop engine feature that was really unsettling at first.

We recently rented a 2019 Equinox with the start/stop feature. It was unsettling at first, as you mentioned. Then we discovered it also meant air conditioning would stop while the engine was off at a stoplight. After a while it would auto-restart (I assume when vent temps increased beyond a certain point), but I just got in the habit of tapping the throttle which would re-start the engine, and keep it running. REALLY annoying. I would never buy a car with this "feature" unless it could be defeated. Seems to me it's more likely designed to help EPA MPG ratings, rather than emissions, but in a mild climate city it would reduce emissions a bit.

As a side note, it is interesting to see that Diesel engines have fallen dramatically in recent years in terms of overall sales in Europe. Only a few years ago, Diesels were around 60% of all cars sold in Europe. It's a fraction of that total now, as Diesels have fallen out of favor. Part of this is due to the Volkswagen Group scandal with Diesel emissions, but it can't be totally blamed for the situation. Despite their efficiency over gasoline engines, Diesel engines pollute more and are IMHO not the answer.

It should be noted that diesel engines produce DIFFERENT pollution, some of which is particulate matter (soot), which settles to the ground instead of going into the atmosphere. So-called experts seem to disagree on how the various types of emissions/pollution actually affects the environment (gas vs diesel vs electric "remote" pollution). I'm not convinced recent/modern passenger vehicle diesels should be vilified as much as they have been, but VAG's Dieselgate really helped screw things up for everyone. Disclaimer: I've owned & driven diesels since I got my license at 16 so I'm slightly biased.

 

[Ntrepid]

I was once told that a car emits the most pollution under two scenarios: starting & accelerating. The start/stop feature must appease the EPA like a magician distracts you with his left hand while his right is doing something to complete the trick/illusion.

Also, isn't the constant starting of the engine bad for an alternator (bad as in accelerating its eventual demise)? Are we saving a few pennies by going longer between fill ups but spending more in the future replacement of the alternator?


Robert

 

[gsxr]

Also, isn't the constant starting of the engine bad for an alternator (bad as in accelerating its eventual demise)? Are we saving a few pennies by going longer between fill ups but spending more in the future replacement of the alternator?

My understanding is, engines with this feature have far more robust starting/electrical systems to support the vastly increased number of starts. I was impressed with how quickly it fires, it's nearly instant, compared with the M119 for example which requires a couple revolutions before roaring to life.

 

[Maui]

Electric cars do offer a couple nice features are the lack of noise and the instant torque. The Tesla infotainment system is awesome. They have their own satellites for the GPS and radio. All you have to do ask the sysyem to play a song and it plays. Just about any music that has ever been recorded is available just by speaking it. The auto pilot was also pretty cool and I look forward to the day when you can input your destination into the GPS and the car will take you there.