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

[xxo]

Study: ‘True Costs’ Of Electric Vehicles Far Higher Than Most Believe | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

 

[Stress_Test]

One thing I'd like to know, which hasn't been addressed to my knowledge, is this: If the government wants to pass laws that mandate (force) electric cars on us, then what about the millions of us that live in apartments and don't have personal garages?

How will the charging situation work? Is someone going to install a charging station for each parking space? Who pays for that?

What about security against vandalism, since the stations will be out in the open all night?

What's going to stop some random ******* from walking through the parking lot at 2am and unplugging a dozen cars, leaving people unable to go to work that later that morning?

If you have an assigned charger for billing purposes, what stops someone from hooking up their vehicle to your charger while you're at work, sticking you with extra costs?

----

So far I just hear a lot of fluffy handwaving talk about transitioning to electric vehicles, without any actual clear-eyed, cold rational discussion about the issues involved in implementing EVs on a large scale in the US.

I guess it's not surprising. I also saw recently that the gov wants to start building wind farm turbines in the Gulf of Mexico, apparently oblivious to the fact that hurricanes come through there on a fairly regular basis! Those storms are bad enough for the oil platforms out there; I imagine those 200 ft diameter wind turbine blades won't fair nearly as well against hurricane force winds!

 

[jtr1962]

More anti-EV FUD. Let's go through things point by point:

But, they argue, "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."

Nobody has factored in the many direct and indirect subsidies to the oil industry when calculating the true price of owning ICE vehicles. That includes not charging oil companies for the mess the leave behind when drilling, the medical costs of air pollution, or the cost of foreign incursions to secure oil supplies ($8 trillion plus since 9/11).

They give evidence that "the average model year (MY) 2021 EV would cost $48,698 more to own over a 10-year period without $22 billion in government favors given to EV manufacturers and owners.

The tax credit for purchasing an EV is at most $7,500, and that's not available for all EVs. Also, the numbers don't work here. $22 billion over ten years, and $48,698 per vehicle in subsidies, implies only 45,000 EVs will be sold over those ten years. In the US alone in 2022 over 800,000 EVs were sold. More will be sold in 2023, although the growth rate is admittedly slowing down.

"When we pay for a gallon of gasoline, we are paying for the entire infrastructure to refine, transport, and market that gasoline," they point out. "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, and will those embedded costs rise over time?"

Last I checked the cost of transmission and distribution is built into the price we all pay for electricity. It's even broken down on most electric bills as "delivery charges", or "grid charges". If those costs start going up due to EVs, that will be reflected by an increase in those charges.

Without increased and sustained government favors, EVs will remain more expensive than ICEVs for many years to come."

Yet they're magically being produced and sold now for not much more than the price of ICE vehicles in countries like China which don't give any subsidies. China has a $4,500 EV. When produced in the same numbers as ICE vehicles, EVs will cost less because they're far less complex. Cost of batteries keeps dropping. Sodium-ion will get us to well under $100/kw-hr.

The source of your article? The Daily Wire.

According to Snopes, "DailyWire.com has a tendency to share stories that are taken out of context or not verified", including an incorrect report on baby names in the Netherlands, a misdated, exaggerated story that protesters were digging up Confederate graves, a false allegation that Democratic congresspeople had refused to stand for a fallen Navy SEAL's widow, and a report that Harvard University was segregating commencement ceremonies (because black students had planned an optional event). The credibility checker NewsGuard assessed in 2021 that The Daily Wire "has sometimes misstated facts, including about COVID-19" but "generally maintains basic standards of credibility and transparency — with significant exceptions".

Various articles by The Daily Wire have engaged in climate change denial by making false or misleading claims when they dispute the scientific consensus on climate change. In 2017, when scientists writing in Climate Feedback described several Daily Wire articles as inaccurate or lacking evidence. The Daily Wire published corrections in two articles, after which the scientists assessed that the updated articles were still misleading. In November 2021, a study by the Center for Countering Digital Hate described The Daily Wire as being among "ten fringe publishers" that together were responsible for nearly 70 percent of Facebook user interactions with content that denied climate change. Facebook said the percentage was overstated and called the study misleading.

The "Coronavirus Misinformation Weekly Briefing" by academics of the Oxford Internet Institute described The Daily Wire's coverage of COVID-19 lockdowns and the World Health Organization as examples of "junk health news" narratives in 2020. Multiple scientific studies have identified The Daily Wire as a fake news website.

In April 2017, The Daily Wire incorrectly credited the Housing and Urban Development secretary, Ben Carson, with finding over $500 billion in accounting errors made by the Obama administration. FactCheck.org reported that the errors were discovered and published by HUD's independent inspector general before Carson became secretary.

 

[jtr1962]

One thing I'd like to know, which hasn't been addressed to my knowledge, is this: If the government wants to pass laws that mandate (force) electric cars on us, then what about the millions of us that live in apartments and don't have personal garages?

China already solved that problem. Their solution addresses all the other issues you mentioned.

So far I just hear a lot of fluffy handwaving talk about transitioning to electric vehicles, without any actual clear-eyed, cold rational discussion about the issues involved in implementing EVs on a large scale in the US.

What about the huge costs of NOT transitioning? If you want the US to become energy independent, we need to get off oil to the maximum extent possible. It's a matter of national security. Then there's the medical costs/shortened life spans due to air pollution. And there's the long-term costs of climate change, although admittedly EVs only solve a fraction of that problem.

I guess it's not surprising. I also saw recently that the gov wants to start building wind farm turbines in the Gulf of Mexico, apparently oblivious to the fact that hurricanes come through there on a fairly regular basis! Those storms are bad enough for the oil platforms out there; I imagine those 200 ft diameter wind turbine blades won't fair nearly as well against hurricane force winds!

This may well be a brain-dead decision, although it's possible to hurricane-proof anything. It's simply a matter of whether or not the extra costs make economic sense.

I'll also say I don't think EVs are a panacea. They only solve two of the many problems associated with a transportation system based mostly on private autos, namely noise and pollution. The others remain. I'd rather that in conjunction with pushing EVs we also started remaking the built infrastructure so owning a vehicle, and having a driver's license, is optional in most of the country. Besides the negative effects, forced car ownership is a financial burden, particularly for the poor and lower middle class.

 

[orbital]

+

Countries are already reeling in their lofty EV goals.

Hybrids are the compromise.
Mentioned this before, you can have small ICE engine charging one of two battery packs in your car (like a generator)
You'll always run on electric, but its via a gas engine that alone would be too small to power the car itself.

Always have the plug-in option on those also

 

[raggie33]

who recalls northcal dale? he was a member here id also guess he had one of the first evs made. cool dude.

 

[jtr1962]

+

Countries are already reeling in their lofty EV goals.

Hybrids are the compromise.
Mentioned this before, you can have small ICE engine charging one of two battery packs in your car (like a generator)
You'll always run on electric, but its via a gas engine that alone would be too small to power the car itself.

Always have the plug-in option on those also

Note that "reeling" simply means the rate of growth of EV sales is slowing. We're still poised to sell way more EVs in 2023 than 2022. And 2024 will be even better. The original goals were very ambitious, so no surprise we're falling short.

Hybrids are the worst of both worlds. More complexity than either an ICE vehicle or a pure EV, and most of the pollution of an ICE. But that's why the automakers like them. More stuff to break, which means more money in spare parts.

It's no secret EVs are forcing automakers to change their business model from one where they make profits over the life of the vehicle with spare parts, to one where most profit is made when it's sold. Tesla had this factored in from day one. Everyone else is still playing catch up.

The current Middle Eastern situation might alter the dynamics of EVs when the price of oil starts skyrocketing.

 

[jtr1962]

who recalls northcal dale? he was a member here id also guess he had one of the first evs made. cool dude.

You mean Darell?

 

[raggie33]

maybe thats it been a while ago. he had a solar home as well.and a gm ev. then gm quit making them i think they even took them away from owners. but my memory sucks..

 

[bigburly912]

The stress EV chargers are going to put on the grid is almost unbelievable. We will have to go back to using more coal or start developing nuclear to handle it. There's a charger that GM uses that took a BANK of 75 kva 277/480 transformers!! I think it was 2 fast chargers if I remember correctly. That's an insane amount of load

 

[raggie33]

The stress EV chargers are going to put on the grid is almost unbelievable. We will have to go back to using more coal or start developing nuclear to handle it. There's a charger that GM uses that took a BANK of 75 kva 277/480 transformers!! I think it was 2 fast chargers if I remember correctly. That's an insane amount of load

i always thought the grid would be more healthy now due to led lighting better hvac and appliances..But im wrong a lot lol

 

[orbital]

Note that "reeling" simply means the rate of growth of EV sales is slowing..

+

Not EV sales numbers,
the date when 'ending' ICE sales. That's being pushed back,, and pushed back, and pushed back.
see what I did there

I'd consider buying a hybrid, never a full EV, never.

 

[raggie33]

id sure think about the McMurtry Spéirling if i win the lotto zero to 60 in 1.5 seconds!!!! and comes with free whiplash. i like tech

 

[orbital]

+

About a month ago, charging infrastructure is a real concern.

The reality of charging outside in the winter for the northern half of the US is 'out of order'

EV charging needs big improvements soon if the auto industry's transition is going to work

There's a groundswell forming to expand and improve the U.S. charging landscape for EVs, but experts agree there's a long road ahead.

www.cnbc.com

 

[jtr1962]

+

Not EV sales numbers,
the date when 'ending' ICE sales. That's being pushed back,, and pushed back, and pushed back.

That's just government book-keeping nonsense. It doesn't matter much if ICEs are around forever, so long as they eventually become niche, much like incandescent bulbs are now. The controlling factor will be when they start to become a lot harder to refuel as more and more gas stations are go out of business, or convert to charging stations. In many places the economics of a gas station are already marginal. Even a 10% decrease in customers who converted to EV could push them over the edge.

And yes, the charging infrastructure is lagging. No argument there.

 

[raggie33]

i always wondered if they can just make it where instead of a refill you rented the batterys? or something like that as you run out of power you drive up or on a lift where the packs are exchanged

 

[orbital]

That's just government book-keeping nonsense.

+

Has nothing to do w/ book keeping, it's bit of reality setting in.

 

[bigburly912]

i always wondered if they can just make it where instead of a refill you rented the batterys? or something like that as you run out of power you drive up or on a lift where the packs are exchanged

There's one company that tried that and it worked horribly. I can't remember who it was. One of the Chinese EV companies.

I like the diesel generators running the EVs. Pretty clean honestly if you run biodiesel.

 

[jtr1962]

+

Has nothing to do w/ book keeping, it's bit of reality setting in.

Trying to make predictions even 5 years into the future with rapidly changing state-of-the-art is a lesson in humility. More often than not even technologists get this stuff wrong.

Some factors here which might merit consideration:

1) The Middle Eastern situation. If that deteriorates into all out war expect oil prices to skyrocket.
2) Advances in batteries which are making them ever more energy dense and inexpensive. It wasn't that long ago here on CPF that I was arguing with people when I said LEDs would largely take over lighting no later than 2020, perhaps earlier. Those who refuted the idea didn't allow for how quickly efficiency improved, and how costs decreased even more quickly. In 2007 a LED putting out 50 lumens cost over $10, and wasn't that much more efficient than a halogen. Now we're at 10 times the efficiency. The cost decreases are far more dramatic. Mid-power LEDs putting out 50 lumens can be had for under a cent in quantity.
3) Vast improvements in charging infrastructure. Remember, gas stations were sparse 100 years ago. That didn't slow the mass adoption of ICE vehicles much. We'll build these things more quickly and cheaply as we learn how to build them. Reliability will also go up. That's actually as large a problem now as the lack of charging stations. Many of them break fairly often.
4) People's attitudes towards air pollution and climate change are changing as the older generations die off. This will spur more adoption of EVs, or better yet more people will go car-free entirely.
5) Increased adoption of home solar. When you can "refuel" at home for free, an EV makes lots of sense. With vehicle to grid it makes even more sense. The car battery can function as a backup in case your power goes out. This is true even if you don't have solar power.
6) More data will become available on the longevity of EV batteries. Right now the prospect of replacing an expensive battery halfway through a vehicle's life is stopping some from adopting EVs. Data so far is showing batteries may actually outlast the rest of the vehicle, perhaps even have significant resale value for grid storage when the rest of the vehicle is junked. A few more years of data are needed, but it looks very promising.

ICE on the other hand is a mature technology. Not much room for improvements. I liken the situation to HDDs versus SSDs. The latter are dropping in cost per TB far more quickly than the former because at this point only incremental improvements for HDDs exist. Eventually we'll reach a crossover point in terms of price. Even now, if your storage needs are a few TB or less, SSDs make the most sense. The cost difference over HDDs is only a few tens of dollars, but you get higher reliability, shock resistance, plus greatly improved speed.

 

[bigburly912]

How are we going to sustain the lithium production needed for EV batteries? The same mining that gets us our coal for power that everyone hates is how you get lithium/kobalt/other components. And it is DIRTY.

I hope technology gets better. It's just a bad deal right now.