Here’s the report that @Mustangman spoke poorly of. I haven’t read it yet. Since it’s free, it seems like I can post it without violating copyright laws. Decide for yourself whether it is misleading.
People afford what they want to afford, and their tax bracket has nothing to do with it.
Look at it this way, I can’t go to a shopping center parking lot without seeing a half-dozen F250 King Ranch pickups with a 6-inch lift kit and 37 inch tires on 22 inch wheels, complete with fender flares, Banks exhaust, LED conversion kit and cow-catcher winch bumpers. No one needs these trucks, they cost crazy money to operate and repair. Not a week goes by that we don’t have one in the shop for upgrades to suspension and brakes that are only needed because of the lift kit and stupid big wheels/tires.
But no one is doing a cost comparison of what it costs to drive these pickups vs. a stock F150. People buy them because they like them. Same thing for EVs and hybrids.
Yeah, that’s an image thing with the jacked up F250. I get that. It’s what they want to drive, for whatever reason. I can’t really see the parallel for a hybrid. People drive hybrids to project a certain image or because they just enjoy driving a hybrid for some reason? I assumed hybrids were for fuel savings only. I do understand driving a Tesla or a Mustang Mach E because you enjoy it or want to portray a certain image. A Chevy Bolt, or a Nissan Leaf…not so much.
I still think the average buyer who just wants a normal sedan or suv/crossover is going to balk on electric if it isn’t more economical to operate.
1 Like
It’s not how much you make…It’s how much you spend.
1 Like
I know several people that drive them to help limit global warming. Better gas mileage means lower emissions, and with a hybrid there is no need to charge the batteries. With a PHEV they can charge them, though most get a very short battery range. Still, the Sienna Hybrid gets 36 mpg in town and highway mileage. That’s way ahead of the competition.
This is pretty interesting for everyone that thinks EV’s are a lot less expensive to run .
I provided a link to that article in the initial post above. I also provided a link to the Anderson report in the FREEP article that you and I referenced. It’s a few posts above yours if you want to read it.
With 40 to 50 % of our electricity generated from fossil fuels, an EV is just as polluting as an ICE car. In West Virginia, where coal is the generator fuel, an EV is twice as polluting as a ICE car. We have put the cart before the horse.
1 Like
True for where you are.
But out West there may be only one coal fired power plant in the whole state, and 60% of the electricity comes (sensibly) from hydroectric. An EV may make more sense in those conditions.
3 Likes
Good point, I think for a lot of the US a 50+ mpg hybrid would be as good or better than an EV, CO2-wise. Look at how much of this map would favor a 55 mpg hybrid:
2 Likes
40 to 60 % from fossil fuel is our national average, depending on rainfall, sun, and wind. Only Norway and France have green electricity. And what about when things go wrong? Fire, flood, storm, earthquake, hurricane, mass evacuations! You can be without grid electricity for a month, as has recently happened. And don’t park too close to the house. If there is a battery fire there is not a good way to extinguish it.
The EV is not to blame for that.
And we know for certain the gasoline engine will keep on polluting but the EV at least has the chance to be less polluting one day.
Those natural disasters can also disrupt refineries, pipelines and power plants.
Same can be said about the phone (or vape pen!) in your pocket.
2 Likes
With no more nuclear nor hydroelectric being constructed, the remaining energy must come from increased coal or natural gas burning, or wind.
EVs are generally charged at night at home where electricity is cheapest so solar can’t help. I’ve seen EV charging stations around but I can’t say that I have ever seen one actually in use. I probably have but it is so rare and has been so long that I just don’t remember.
My point is that as electricity demand increases that most of that demand is going to be met by increased coal / natural gas burning! NO NEW NUCLEAR NOR HYDRO SOURCES CAN BE USED. It’s completely wrong to say that if a particular area gets 60% of its electricity from nuclear or hydro that 60% of the energy to charge a car comes from nuclear or hydro. The truth is 100% of the energy to charge that car will come from coal / natural gas, wind power or limited solar.
That’s not true from what I’ve read. Supposedly an EV is still more “carbon friendly” over the lifetime of the vehicle. Not sure how they calculated that or if they calculated correctly or were biased. You’d have to take into account the carbon released to produce both vehicles (takes more energy to produce the EV and its battery) and the carbon released/mile driven to charge the EV on a coal fired plant vs the carbon released to drive a regular car per mile driven at some average assumed mpg. Plus you’d have to take into account the carbon released to produce a replacement EV battery at some point, I suppose.
I’m not a big climate change guy by any means. We don’t need to get into that. All that aside, I’ve wondered how much carbon savings there’d be by going to a 55 mph speed limit again. Less fuel burned would equate to less carbon released. I’m thinking the carbon savings there might be equal to or better than the carbon savings we’d get from a bunch of EV’s charging on a predominately fossil fuel grid. Especially since you’d reduce carbon across the board, semi’s, older cars, and all. With the EV’s, you’re only reducing carbon if you own one, and it’s going to take a pretty long time before everyone is driving one, if that ever happens. Plus you wouldn’t have the need for charging infrastructure, which isn’t going to be cheap or overnight.
Well, the fact that it “isn’t the EV’s fault” doesn’t really change anything if the “we must act now or it’s too late” rhetoric is true! I don’t know. Kind of a shell game, a lot of it. Stop pipeline construction but consume the same amount of oil by buying more oil from foreign countries. That seems cart in front of the horse for sure.
2 Likes
This I agree with.
This is like comparing a house fire to a camp fire. EV battery is going to be on a whole other level compared to a vape pen battery fire.
1 Like
I don’t understand what you’re trying to say here. It seems as though you’re saying that 20% of the electricity in the state comes from fossil fuels but 100% of the electricity going into the car comes from fossil fuels. What?
3 Likes
Really? In the last 10 years there have been several dozen solar farms built within 30 miles of my house. And that’s here in the North East where Solar isn’t as good as places like Arizona.
In 2013 Indianapolis airport has built one of the largest solar farms in the world. And it’s still growing. Other airports are looking into doing the same thing. Actually a great idea since they have all this open space that’s not used.
2 Likes
I read enough of the paper to make comments. I think it provides a framework to estimate costs of EVs vs ICEs. Use Table 5 and keep whatever pertains to you and toss the rest. For me, I would use a gas cost of $3.25/gallon. I would use the overnight cost of electricity at home and ignore commercial charging entirely. I would amortize the cost of installing the level 2 home charger, about $2000 for me, over 10 years. OTOH, I could take advantage of tax credits available and not pay any extra for charger installation. There are no extra registration fees for EVs in Maryland. I ignore deadhead costs for both ICE and EV. I combine my refueling with other trips and even if I used a commercial charger, there is one next to Trader Joe’s and my favorite liquor store. In the odd circumstance I would need a quick charge, I could easily spend up to an hour in those stores and go for my daily walk in the neighborhood surrounding them.
In that the authors provide a method for estimating costs that can be modified for any user, I think it is worthwhile. I’m not paying for the rest of their upcoming reports though.
That’s OK he don’t understand either. 
2 Likes