True cost to run EV like paying $17.33 per gallon if not for $22 billion in government subsidies.

[letschat7]

Why so bold?

 

[alpg88]

 

[Monocrom]

If car-makers actually cared about the masses, they'd make better technology hybrids. Utilize existing resources (gas-stations). While replacing ICE vehicles. Without the lunacy of making cars that the masses (apartment dwellers) have literally no way of recharging at home. Which isn't helped by outdoor charging stations being in microscopic numbers, and easily taking far longer than how quickly a traditional vehicle can be re-fueled. As of now 8.5 million people in NYC alone. 7,500 outdoor, public charging stations that are shared with two cities in New Jersey. So literally tens of millions of residents.... 7,500 charging stations. That is literally laughable!

 

[kaichu dento]

If car-makers actually cared about the masses, they'd make better technology hybrids.

I've liked hybrids from the first time I saw one, they actually make sense.

 

[alpg88]

If car-makers actually cared about the masses, they'd make better technology hybrids.

It is not really about car makers, but those who regulate them. those do not care about either. this green agenda has nothing to do with environment,
Hybrids are more expensive, complex. also use batteries, so they have similar impact on environment, as electrics as far as mining, and toxic waste disposal. they do not reduce oil dependence by much, After all thing considered, the cleanest vehicles would be simple ice cars. Even today they got to the point, where emissions are pretty clean, fuel consumption low, and energy/resources involved into manufacturing lower than hybrids.
I had a hybrid, in real world it did not save me much on fuel, had more issues than similar ice car, i tried once, never bough a hybrid again,

 

[kaichu dento]

It is not really about car makers, but those who regulate them. those do not care about either. this green agenda has nothing to do with environment...

Bingo. I'd still buy a hybrid eventually if one of the better models showed up, like the ones that my friends in Japan have been so happy with, but again, only for the right price and it would only be if I wanted it, not for some fairy tale control agenda.

 

[jtr1962]

I had a hybrid, in real world it did not save me much on fuel, had more issues than similar ice car, i tried once, never bough a hybrid again,

Sort of what I've been saying. Hybrids don't really solve any problem. They reduce fuel consumption a bit, but at the expense of a lot of extra complexity.

The basic problem with EVs for many city dwellers seems to be lack of charging infrastructure. China's trying battery swapping. Another solution is this:

This Electrified Road Charges Your EV as You Drive

Inductive coils under the asphalt transfer energy to on-vehicle receivers ⚡️

www.popularmechanics.com

We're also installing inductive charging in parking spots.

All that said, I'd rather see the government give incentives to make people less dependent upon automobiles, rather than get them to switch from ICE to EV. In cities especially, private autos cause a boatload of problems. If public transit were better, plus biking was safer, a lot fewer urban residents would feel the need to own a car. In the meantime though, I'm all in favor of refundable tax credits for those who don't own a car, and even larger credits for those who don't have a driver's license.

 

[jtr1962]

As of now 8.5 million people in NYC alone. 7,500 outdoor, public charging stations that are shared with two cities in New Jersey. So literally tens of millions of residents.... 7,500 charging stations. That is literally laughable!

Well, there are only 50 gas stations in Manhattan. I'll bet good money in the entire NY metro area there are fewer than 7,500 gas stations. Granted, most have several pumps, so maybe you're looking at tens of thousands of pumps.

My point is it's not the number of charging stations which matter as much as the recharge time. It's possible to make EV batteries which charge in 5 minutes:

An electric-car battery that can be charged as fast as filling up your gas tank was just shown off by a startup

The new battery can be fully charged in five minutes — hours faster than a Tesla plugged into a traditional home charger.

www.businessinsider.com

If you replace gas pumps with 5 minute chargers on a 1-to-1 basis, the problem is solved. More than solved actually because the vast majority of households in the NY metro area have driveways or garages for slow overnight charging. It's mainly the apartment dwellers who need quick public recharging.

 

[MyUsernameTX]

I just recently bought an EV, so maybe I'm biased. But that article might be the dumbest thing I've ever read...

No, its not like paying $17 a gallon... At all. What are they smoking?


>When an EV owner connects to the electric grid, how much are they paying for the extra generation, transmission, and distribution costs that they are imposing on the grid


Uhhhh, all of it? What? It does not matter what you plug in. If I run my oven for 10 hours solid, its the same as an EV. Electric prices cover all of that, or at least, they should. If they don't, its a failure of the electricity market, not what is being powered.


>EVs will remain more expensive than ICEVs for many years to come

This guy is living in the 1960's I guess, because we own an EV and it is literally 10x cheaper to fuel and the vehicle cost the same or less as a comparable fast vehicle with the same features

 

[alpg88]

No, its not like paying $17 a gallon... At all. What are they smoking?

they are not smoking, they calculating all real cost with no gvmnt incentives, with taxes that we pay for when buying gas, and subsidies included.

Well, there are only 50 gas stations in Manhattan. I'll bet good money in the entire NY metro area there are fewer than 7,500 gas stations. Granted, most have several pumps, so maybe you're looking at tens of thousands of pumps.

yet, aside from sandy gas shortage we had for few weeks, when i pull up to fill my tank, there are more available pumps than not at any station in nyc., I spend no more than 5 min, and do not come again for a week or more.

 

[Monocrom]

Well, there are only 50 gas stations in Manhattan. I'll bet good money in the entire NY metro area there are fewer than 7,500 gas stations. Granted, most have several pumps, so maybe you're looking at tens of thousands of pumps.

Oh, there used to be a whole helluva lot more! This city has been waging a not so subtle war on cars for the last 20 years. Doing their absolute best to fine and shut-down as many gas-stations as possible to horribly inconvenience the Working class who need cars to commute to and from work. The corruption from this city has caused many gas-station owners to sell, when knowledgeable private 3rd parties have offered to buy up the ones not fined out of existence. Also, we both know that Manhattan isn't all of NYC. Not even remotely.

My job-site neighborhood alone has 11 gas-stations within a very short distance of each other. Been at the current client's site for a decade. Seen a lot of businesses in that neighborhood close up.... But not one single gas station.

My point is it's not the number of charging stations which matter as much as the recharge time. It's possible to make EV batteries which charge in 5 minutes....

I'm sorry but obviously both of those matter. I can pay and fuel up in less than 2 minutes. Even with 5 minute fast charging, you pull into a station and if just a handful of cars are in front of you, you're screwed! Even if everyone takes just 5 minutes.

If you replace gas pumps with 5 minute chargers on a 1-to-1 basis, the problem is solved. More than solved actually because the vast majority of households in the NY metro area have driveways or garages for slow overnight charging. It's mainly the apartment dwellers who need quick public recharging.

Thing is, they're not being replaced now. Clearly 5 minute fast chargers aren't ready for mass production and installation NOW. The future is one thing, we need solutions right now. And, as pointed out above, you pull into a crowded station with multiple 5 minute chargers; it's still not as fast as re-fueling an ICE vehicle.

 

[Monocrom]

>EVs will remain more expensive than ICEVs for many years to come

This guy is living in the 1960's I guess, because we own an EV and it is literally 10x cheaper to fuel and the vehicle cost the same or less as a comparable fast vehicle with the same features

Guessing he meant without Government subsides in place to off-set the costs with tax-payer dollars. My best friend of 30+ years is a huge convert to the EV movement.... Yet, even he's putting off buying a Chevy Bolt until the subsidy from the U.S. Federal Government kicks in at the start of 2024. Let's face it, if it wasn't for that, the vast majority of EVs would be owned as toys by the wealthy Ultra Elites.

 

[alpg88]

Average mileage driven a year is 12000, that means 1000 a month, average range of an average car in a city 200miles, highway 300-350. that means an average car fills up 4 times a month, 48 times a year, average tank now cost, 55. that is 2640 dollar a year to fill up, a gallon is about 3.75 on average, all taxes federal state local around 75-80, roughly a quarter of the price, so about 660buck is what a gas car owner pays in tax a year, a ny registration is renewed every 2 years. i suggest adding 1300 to a registration renewal fee for every EV car or truck.
A tesla 3 sticker price is about 55k, someone from SF a little while ago said you can get them for 26k, that means incentives, discounts, and subsidy from gvmnt, which you do not get for an ice car, since covid you no longer even get discounts that dealers used to give you before automatically. yet a Ev car gets 20k off. however those discounts and incentives that gvmnt gives them are our tax money, so we end up paying half the cost of an EV. lets not forget a tax credit, remove that, and price goes up even more,

 

[kaichu dento]

The future is one thing, we need solutions right now.

Hey, I've got an idea that might work! How about if government keeps its nose out of it and just allow a natural transition to what works best, which for now is to let us use whatever each individual chooses, without forcing those not interested in elective vehicles to pay for those who are.

In my view electric-only vehicles are niche products and should be paid for solely by the ones who want them. The best cars for the masses are the ones we've already got, and for those with the money to do so, hybrid is very interesting too. Let the buyer purchase that which they can afford, and are personally interested in.

 

[M@elstrom]

Unfortunately there are too many who expect Big Government to make their decisions for them.... and for everyone else as well... Big Government IS the problem not the solution 🤣

 

[jtr1962]

Hey, I've got an idea that might work! How about if government keeps its nose out of it and just allow a natural transition to what works best, which for now is to let us use whatever each individual chooses, without forcing those not interested in elective vehicles to pay for those who are.

So long as we don't force those who don't use ICE vehicles to pay for those that do. Or taking it one step further, force those with no desire to own an automobile to pay for those who do. The subsidies for the fossil fuel industry are lavish:

Yes, Fossil Fuel Subsidies Are Real, Destructive And Protected By Lobbying

Fossil fuel subsidies are a form of corruption that enriches fossil fuel shareholders at the expense of Earth’s 7.5 billion people. Fossil fuels have created the climate crisis that needs to be attacked urgently. We need a serious carbon tax, and the fossil fuel subsidies need to go.

www.forbes.com

A 5 Trillion Dollar Subsidy: How We All Pay For Fossil Fuels

Each year, fossil fuel producers receive trillions of dollars in subsidies. This reflects an epic market failure. Our atmosphere is a vital shared resource, and current policies allow producers to treat it like a garbage dump. Climate action is key to protect our health and the health of the planet.

www.forbes.com

In the US especially subsidies to make automobile use a necessity, instead of an option, are huge:

Subsidizing Suburbia: A forgotten history of how the government created suburbia - Market Urbanism

This is the first article of a five-part series on suburbia in the United States. In primary school, one of my friends lived in a duplex. This fact blew my mind. To my inexperienced 7-year-old mind, a duplex barely registered as a house. Her family shared a driveway with their neighbors, and...

marketurbanism.com

Fortunately your country went in a better direction and built a very nice rail system. And also did smart things like requiring off-street parking before being permitted to own an automobile in Tokyo.

We crossed that bridge a long time ago, before either of us was born, with the government keeping its nose out of it.

In my view electric-only vehicles are niche products and should be paid for solely by the ones who want them. The best cars for the masses are the ones we've already got, and for those with the money to do so, hybrid is very interesting too. Let the buyer purchase that which they can afford, and are personally interested in.

In general automobiles period should be a niche product mainly owned by the wealthy, as was the case in the beginning. I'm glad I live in a place where auto ownership is optional for lots of people. In most of the US that's not the case. I would be very resentful being forced to own something which costs high four or five figures a year, and which is still often delayed by congestion, just to partake economically.

ICE cars are hardly good for the masses. You have air and noise pollution for starters. The price of gas speaks for itself. Then the maintenance costs far exceed those of EVs, which is really one the reasons there's a desire to maintain the status quo. Repair shops, spare parts businesses, etc. all stand to lose big if we go all EV. Better for the end user though once the price gets comparable to ICE vehicles, which is happening in the next few years.

Average mileage driven a year is 12000, that means 1000 a month, average range of an average car in a city 200miles, highway 300-350. that means an average car fills up 4 times a month, 48 times a year, average tank now cost, 55. that is 2640 dollar a year to fill up, a gallon is about 3.75 on average, all taxes federal state local around 75-80, roughly a quarter of the price, so about 660buck is what a gas car owner pays in tax a year, a ny registration is renewed every 2 years. i suggest adding 1300 to a registration renewal fee for every EV car or truck.

I hope you know when you pay for electric to charge an EV, taxes are part of that. If you drive an EV 12,000 miles a year, you'll use at least 2,500 kW-hr. Current rates in NYC are about $0.30/kW-hr, give or take. 4.5% taxes are added to that. That means you're paying over $30 annually in sales tax, plus the other surcharges added on the electric bill which typically equal the sales tax. Yes, less tax than gas tax, but the cost to "refill" is far less also, only about $750 annually, versus several thousands to refill an ICE. Not intentional, but you just demonstrated one of the huge advantages of owing an EV. If you save $2,000 a year recharging versus refilling, over 15 years that's $30K. This isn't even including the lower maintenance costs. Bottom line, even with EVs costing $10K or $20K more, in the long run you come out ahead. That's one reason commercial fleets like Amazon are adopting them.

There's talk of having a mileage charge to make up for the fact EVs don't pay gas tax. I'm on the fence as to whether or not that's a good idea. The gas tax only pays for Interstate highways, not local or state roads. Also, road wear is roughly proportional to the fourth power of weight, which basically means heavy trucks are responsible for practically all the wear and tear on roads. I'd rather just tax the sh*t out of trucks on a per mile and weight basis, whether electric or ICE, and transition away from the gas tax as a means to pay for roads. Those driving autos shouldn't subsidize the trucking industry, which is exactly what they do now via the gas tax.

A tesla 3 sticker price is about 55k, someone from SF a little while ago said you can get them for 26k, that means incentives, discounts, and subsidy from gvmnt, which you do not get for an ice car, since covid you no longer even get discounts that dealers used to give you before automatically. yet a Ev car gets 20k off.

Or maybe Tesla is just lowering the cost of making them, and passing it on. The only incentive I'm aware of is the $7,500 one from the feds. Like I said repeatedly, as battery cost has gone down, EVs have gotten closer to price parity with ICEs. We probably should phase out the subsidies within a year or two as they're no longer needed. They did the job of helping to level the playing field when EVs cost significantly more. Those days are over.

I'd rather government use a carrot/stick approach at this point to discourage all these huge vehicles, whether EV or ICE. Maybe have registration fees proportional to weight to the fourth power. Have a baseline where a 3,000 pound vehicle costs the same as now. That means a 6,000 pound SUV or pickup would cost 16 times as much to register. For NYC things like Kei cars are perfect. Easy to park, cheaper to own, they still get you where you're going.

Last thing is the rest of the world is going EV far more rapidly than the US. If we don't make these vehicles, someone else will, so we're only spiting ourselves in the long run.

 

[Toulouse42]

Here's a thought. A Canadian engineer, Ken Gregory, has calculated how much it will cost to go completely Net Zero in the USA. His report is published under the title "The Cost of Net Zero Electrification of the U.S.A (V2 - August 2022). The cost, if we do away with fossil fuels altogether is USD 290 trillion. Thats USD 1.1 million per US adult. There is a cheaper scenario if fossil fuels are used as the backup for when the wind is too little or too much or for when the sun doesn't shine. That's still USD 21 trillion (IIRC). His calculations are based upon stats for power demand etc published by the Government agencies in the US. This is the most convincing calculation that I have seen so far. I published a letter to this effect in my local newspaper last month but got not one single response, not even to critique the report's findings.

If his calculations are even vaguely correct, then we all have much bigger problems than whether electric cars work or don't work.

He explains his reasoning in a Youtube video entitled "A Climate Conversation". He's introduced about half way through and (to me) makes perfect sense. But, I'm an accountant, not an engineer. (Apologies to Bones McCoy).

Is there anyone on CPF that has the background to understand the report and maybe comment?

 

[jtr1962]

Here's a thought. A Canadian engineer, Ken Gregory, has calculated how much it will cost to go completely Net Zero in the USA. His report is published under the title "The Cost of Net Zero Electrification of the U.S.A (V2 - August 2022). The cost, if we do away with fossil fuels altogether is USD 290 trillion. Thats USD 1.1 million per US adult. There is a cheaper scenario if fossil fuels are used as the backup for when the wind is too little or too much or for when the sun doesn't shine. That's still USD 21 trillion (IIRC).

Why not use nuclear as a backup? Per megawatt-hour nuclear costs less than either coal or natural gas.

Assuming we do that, and his numbers are correct, that's only $78,000 per US adult. Also, this cost is spread over a number of years. I think 2050 is the timeframe to go net zero by. So that's ~$3,000 annually per US adult. Hardly seems all that onerous.

Is there anyone on CPF that has the background to understand the report and maybe comment?

My only comment without knowing more about the report would be are these net costs he calculated, or just the cost of transitioning without accounting for the savings moving away from fossil fuels. Just for starters that would include less spent on medical costs, less on foreign wars to secure oil supplies, less on the destruction caused by natural disasters.

Beyond this, is he accounting for the fact that new technologies always get much less expensive when implemented on a widespread basis? Is he assuming 2023 costs all the way into the future? If so, his numbers might be off by as much as an order of magnitude.

Look at EVs. TCO is quite a bit less than ICEs, even with present higher purchase prices. As for electrical generation, right now solar comes in at the lowest cost per megawatt-hour. That's only going to decrease further in the future with advances in solar panels.

One reason many people are collectively sh*tting themselves about the transition is it's going to hurt their bottom line if they're invested in the status quo. But that's just a part of capitalism. Not too many people mourned the demise of farriers or elevator operators when new technology made them obsolete. Besides, many jobs in renewables can be done by former employees of fossil fuel companies with a little retraining.

 

[Monocrom]

So long as we don't force those who don't use ICE vehicles to pay for those that do.

No tax-payer dollars should be used to subsidize ANY type of automobiles. Definitely agree with you there.

In the US especially subsidies to make automobile use a necessity, instead of an option, are huge....

In most of America, automobile ownership is a necessity. No one made it that way. Before Henry Ford came out with the Model T and made automobiles affordable to the masses, folks could only look for jobs within walking distance of their home. Granted, walking distance was very different to what folks would consider it now. But usually right around 3 miles one-way. Maybe a bit longer if you scored a decent-paying job. If you found a job in the same neighborhood where you lived, that was considered a HUGE perk!

Automobiles opened up options for people. Hate your boss? Quit your job, find a new one. It's 20 miles away one-way? Heck that's about 40 minutes with no traffic. Only an hour with traffic. No problem. Sorry, but people need cars. That need is an organic one.

In general automobiles period should be a niche product mainly owned by the wealthy, as was the case in the beginning.

Again, the masses are far better off in terms of job options than back before Mr. Ford created the Model T.

I'm glad I live in a place where auto ownership is optional for lots of people.

I'm sorry but that's not the case. Are we talking about the old neighborhood? True, bus and subway service is very good there. But I still sometimes have to drive through Flushing to get to my current job. Any night of the week, streets are crowded with cars. Driving through there in the morning, 10x worse! And keep in mind, the old neighborhood is serviced very well through public transportation.

If we're talking NYC as a whole, outside of Manhattan (where, yes; you literally don't need to own a car if you work, live, and play exclusively on Manhattan island) folks need cars! I've mentioned this before, I work at night at a neighborhood that is very busy, very packed; with barely any parking options.... Yet for some bizarre reason, only two bus lines go through it. And, outside of Rush hour on the weekdays, forget it! No subway stations anywhere in that neighborhood. You either own a car and drive or you call ahead for a cab. Since in most NYC neighborhoods outside Manhattan, you will literally never see one just cruising the streets looking for a fare.

And it's not just that one neighborhood! Most of NYC, you need a car. I mean genuine "need." Trust me, I despise having to have bought one. The fact that in a couple more years I'll have to buy a newer one. Constantly pay for Insurance. Registration every two years. This fee, that fee.... Yeah, I don't enjoy literally spending tens of thousands of dollars on my car. But again, it's a necessity of modern-day life for the vast majority of Americans.

Last thing is the rest of the world is going EV far more rapidly than the US. If we don't make these vehicles, someone else will....

Diving head-first into something early on, isn't always a good argument. For example: World War One. Yes, the rest of the world is quickly adopting EV technology. Why? If the desire is to replace ICE vehicles among the masses, I've already pointed out in other threads why that idea is (as of today) a miserable failure. The collective masses have no where to plug EV vehicles into. Not right now, not today. That fact isn't going to change anytime soon.

 

[alpg88]

I hope you know when you pay for electric to charge an EV, taxes are part of that.

NO they are not, right now whether you use power for your fridge, or charge the car, go to the same place, which is not to support road infrastructure, where gas tax money are going,