Bishop Hill points us to this video of the Tesla Supercharging station at the Harris Ranch exit of Interstate 5 in California. He writes: “How can one resist posting a video of Tesla electric cars being recharged (so it is claimed) using a diesel generator? These people love the environment you see.”
The video shows a portable diesel generator next to the charging station and some Tesla automobiles. Watch this short video:
The video is captioned: Teslas charging off a diesel generator behind the Harris Ranch battery swap station. Filmed by Edward Niedermeyer on 5/22/2015 at Harris Ranch, CA as part of Daily Kanban’s investigation into Tesla’s battery swap program.
At first I thought maybe this was simply a backup generator for power outages, then I dug deeper. It seems the charging station is a converted car wash at the Shell gas station there. It turns out that it is not just a charging station, but also a battery swap station, part of Tesla’s much touted battery swap program. What I learned was that there were pictures showing how the station works, taken during construction, here are a couple:
![Tesla-Battery-Swap-Harris-Ranch-1[1]](https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/tesla-battery-swap-harris-ranch-11.jpg)
![Tesla-Battery-Swap-Harris-Ranch-6[1]](https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/tesla-battery-swap-harris-ranch-61.jpg)
Source:http://www.teslarati.com/peek-teslas-battery-swap-station-harris-ranch/Tesla has approximated each battery swap to take on average of 3 minutes through the use of robots and pneumatics.
So much for “emissions free” driving.Tesla Battery Swap Unused Over Busy Holiday Weekend
Timelapse footage of Tesla’s battery swap station not being used during the busiest driving holiday of the year. Also visible: two backup Superchargers hooked up to a Doosan diesel generator. Filmed by Edward Niedermeyer at Harris Ranch, CA on Saturday, May 23 2015 as part of Daily Kanban’s investigation of Tesla’s battery swap program.
The BIG laugh here?
Those are extremely heavily subsidised cars. But Alarmists look at that video and point to the “fossil fuel” being used to recharge them as being the beneficiary of subsidy. Is that nuts or what?
So in a way, those diesel generators are receiving the indirect benefits of a subsidy – the electric car subsidy.
It’s stupid BS pieces like this that will damage the reputation of the WUWT brand. There ARE NO Tesla battery swap stations. They do not exist. This is a proof of concept, a trial, a prototype of what they hope to have in the future. Of course they’re going to need auxiliary power for a free-standing prototype. Truly, truly shameful article.
Oh, lighten up.
Eh… let him yell. He’ll prove his stupidity soon enough.
What is truly shameful is the that Tesla is already receiving the full carbon credit for battery swapping stations.
“Sustainable” profits? And for whom? The business or the business owners? (Solyndra went bankrupt but the owners walked away with a nice chunk of the taxpayers’ change.) Take away the credits and the subsidies and what “sustainable” profit is there really?
I agree Israel,
Healthy scientific skepticism of extraordinary AGW theories is one thing, but I’ve noticed that it has led to a kind of mindless, knee-jerk, reactionary element coming forth.
Anti-AGWers are against everything that pro-AGWer are for, and anything that is sold with a pro environment message.
So, if Michael Mann recommended Penn State as a good school, should anti-AGWers avoid Penn State, send their kids to other schools, root for any team playing against a Penn State team?
Just because AGWers have pushed electric cars does not affect the economic value or moral status of these types of vehicles. They are what they are. My father helped design the Dash 8 diesel electric locomotives. Are anti-AGWers implying that back in the 60s and 70s, he was part of the AGW con/hoax? How does applying the same technology to cars change the answer?
Electric vehicles have been used as golf carts for a long time. They may or may not be useful or economical as replacement for internal combustion engine vehicles. In my opinion, they are not.
However, as soon as I read
this back in 2011, I realized that this could change everything. It’s a big IF, but if batteries could be quickly replaced, at any gas station, then the major objection would be removed. I still think the hybrid design (TDI diesel + batteries + EM motor) is the ideal, from an engineering point of view.
There is nothing evil or unscientific about the Battery Swap Pilot Program. It’s smart and good business. They may or may not be succeeding, but if they don’t, just as when Penn State loses a football game, it will not be an argument against AGW.
The economic value is less than zero, as is their moral value.
Yes, they do allow people who get rich off of other people’s money to feel good about themselves, but there is nothing moral about that.
“knee Jerk”? Irony much? Read the links in the update, it’s a ponzi scheme, they’re raking in millions by pretending to have a battery swap station, the battery forms part of the chassis, it’s stuck in with mastic to avoid problems with chassis flexing, it cannot be swapped.
Forgot to finish the thought regarding golf carts: Does that make golf courses part of the AGW conspiracy?
Frosty, you don’t understand, they believe that they are saving the planet, and that’s all that matters.
Just because most of the stuff they believe happens to be bunk isn’t relevant.
Israel and VikingExplorer are spot on.
Earlier I said that I had seen no plausible explanation here for the generator, but LeeHarvey (May 28, 2015 at 8:03 am) has one.
I think there’s knee-jerkery here on alternative energy, but there’s knee-jerkery the other way elsewhere. It’s frustrating.
“Of course they’re going to need auxiliary power for a free-standing prototype.”
Not much of a prototype if it doesn’t include a power supply. “Of course they are going to need a tug for a prototype ship”
Okay here is what is going on.
Since if you can afford a Tesla you obviously work a Tesla battery swap station will have very high peak demand during the morning and evening rush. With Monday morning and evening being times of extremely high demand as people swap out from the weekend. They will do practically no business in the middle of the day. California has insanely high demand charges for commercial and industrial load.
They were probably unable to make the place profitable by using grid connection because the demand charges were eating them alive. So it became more economical to generate onsite power.
Tom T, your answer seems quite reasonable. The consequence of not building power plants for political reasons is that there is not enough supply to meet demand in the heat of summer. During those times, the utility spins up back up generation facilities. They have a range of sources, always more expensive than the large power plants. I know on the east coast, one such high demand facility consists of a large number of jet engines. The cost of electricity skyrockets.
I worked on a software project called “demand response”, which allows businesses to stop using power (lowering demand) during these high demand events. They get paid to do this. It’s worth it for the power system, because it’s cheaper than the high cost generation. It’s worth it for the business (especially for high power users like cement mixers), because they can shift their work, and the amount paid is more than their normal operating expenses. Whereas homes typically get a fixed price for kWh, a high power usage business will be charged the current hourly price.
Tesla is probably willing to lose money on charging in order to sell more cars. The bottom line is that whether they used grid power or not, no one has been under the delusion that grid power consists of solar, so it means nothing. It’s a cheap shot.
They’re raking in $1000’s extra per vehicle sold in ZEV credit revenue; to qualify for this extra subsidy they need to be able to “fast refuel” (under 3 mins) so they pretend to have a battery swap option, without which they can only claim around $4k per vehicle rather than the $7-9k per vehicle with fast refueling.
It’s a scam, and it’s criminal.
VE: “It’s worth it for the business”
Not necessarily. At the plants I worked with on power cost, the manufacturing people were far more interested in things other than taking a shutdown to save some money. They had production requirements, orders to fill, etc. Their other priorities reigned.
If everything is good for electric cars, why do they need subsidies from the taxpayers? If they are better than gasoline-driven cars then let them compete without subsidies.
>> VE: “It’s worth it for the business” Not necessarily
Who said “necessarily”? You can’t really dispute that some businesses decided that it was worth it with an anecdotal. Like I said, they can shift the work to another day, or to night time.
>> If everything is good for electric cars, why do they need subsidies from the taxpayers?
When did I say either of these things?
I believe the pure electric car is a non-starter business wise, and that no business should receive any subsidies.
VE: “Who said “necessarily”? You can’t really dispute that some businesses decided that it was worth it with an anecdotal.”
You claimed it was good for businesses. I’m telling you your blanket statement is false. It may be good for some businesses. I’m telling you that major corporate businesses that are household names that I worked with decided that it was not good business. Business has many considerations; power cost is only one of them.
Gc,
Read what I wrote again. I said business, not all businesses. Its a product so it’s all voluntary. The fact that they bought the product and partipated means they thought it was worth it.
Actually Tom T, Harris Ranch is pretty much in the middle of nowhere on Interstate 5, so there aren’t really rush hours there. It’s more like a constant stream of traffic between S. and N. California, including the middle of the day. They also have a lot of charging stations in the parking lot of the Harris Ranch restaurant.
I stop there every time I drive down south (the restaurant and bar are superb there. It is probably among the best freeway stops on the planet).
The flow of traffic may be constant but will the flow of Tesla’s? You may be right about the location but that only switches the peak. Instead of it probably being a Monday morning and evening rush there it will be a weekend rush which would probably be even worse in terms of your monthly demand charge ratchet.
Your demand charge is a flat fee per kWh of monthly peak demand. So if your flow is concentrated on weekend commuters then your demand charge would be even worse than if your peak was weekday commuters with the demand spread out over Monday through Friday.
Then when California converts to a fee for miles driven in place of a gas tax or in addition to it, Tesla can just haul it customer’s vehicles on flatbed trucks with diesel engines from place to place. It could be marketed as Smart Haul Systems and explained as on-board charging in place of stations. Well, someone has to keep the tax credits flowing.
You bring up a good point. If electric vehicles become the rage, revenue from gas taxes will fall and they WILL go to a fee for miles driven. It’s like that with all usage based taxes. If you use less the tax revenue decreases. In order to keep those revenues level tax rates must go up. So what’s the point of using less if it is going to cost the same?
Unless you can keep up with Musk on using tax credits, then you are losing ground in filling the road revenue pothole.
The major, unresolved problem is that you use your car during the day and it is dark and usually calmer (less wind) at night, So just how is a battery operated vehicle going to help unless and until we get the majority of our power from Nuclear. Nuclear power actually generates less “life cycle” (from mine to decommissioning and return to green earth) CO2 than Wind or Solar. If and when the USA recycles spent nuclear fuel that meager amount will decrease even further.
It helps by being much cheaper. A gasoline internal combustion engine operates in the range 10 to 25 cents/mile. An electric vehicle operates in the range 1-3 cents/mile. However, an electric vehicle has a range and recharging problem.
Solution #1: plug in hybrid (best of both worlds)
Solution #2: ubiquitous battery replacement facilities
Solution #2 seems a bit speculative at the moment. However, the future is hard to predict. I like #1.
You are ignoring the higher initial costs and the cost of replacing those batteries every few years.
Beyond that, gas cars have to pay road taxes that electrics (for now) are avoiding.
An EV does not run at 1-3 cents a mile. The best you’ll do in an EV at average U.S. electric rates is 4 cents a mile.
Where are you getting 10-25 cents per mile?
That seems ridiculously high. Even my own vehicle which gets significantly lower mileage than my last one is in the range of 7-8 cents per mile.
Even my own vehicle which gets significantly lower mileage than my last one is in the range of 7-8 cents per mile.
Unless you live in one of those corners of America with really low gas prices and taxes, I simply don’t believe you. I’ve been putting numbers into spreadsheets for my EV for going on three years. As part of that exercise, I record the price of gas for comparative purposes. The cheapest it’s ever shown was 9 cents a mile when gas prices fell off the cliff a few months ago — for a subcompact comparison car getting 30 mpg.
>> Unless you live in one of those corners of America with really low gas prices and taxes, I simply don’t believe you.
Jake J, you’re an idiot for calling everyone a liar. Why would CodeTech lie about something like that? Is he another lunatic EVangelist?
>> Where are you getting 10-25 cents per mile?
CodeTech, from personal experience, which is old information. The 10 was a Volkswagen beetle and the 25 was a Ford econoline van. I’m happy to modify that to a range of 7 – 25 cents.
“The cheapest it’s ever shown was 9 cents a mile when gas prices fell off the cliff a few months ago — for a subcompact comparison car getting 30 mpg.”
Up here, I make the cost of driving my SUV around town about 0.15 Canadian Pesos per mile. The difference in cost between that vehicle and a mid-range Tesla would appear to pay for my fuel for nearly half a million miles.
No it does not. how much does 85kwhr cost, home price, full tariff for 150 miles if you are lucky.
Why would CodeTech lie about something like that? Is he another lunatic EVangelist?
Speaking of putting words in people’s mouths …
However, 4 cents is still quite good. Here are my calculations for operating costs:
2015 Ford C-Max Energi Plug-in Hybrid: 37 kWh => 20 miles, @ur momisugly .10/kWh, OC = .185 $/mile
2015 Toyota Prius Plug-in Hybrid: 29 kWh => 11 miles, @ur momisugly .10/kWh, OC = .263 $/mile
2014 Honda Accord Plug-in Hybrid: 29 kWh => 11 miles, @ur momisugly .10/kWh, OC = .223 $/mile
Source: FuelEconomy.gov
The average U.S. electricity rate is 12 cents a kWh, not including base charges, taxes, and other fees. You’d be a lot more credible if you didn’t just pull numbers out of your posterior.
JakeJ
“Average rate” for the Basic Line rate for the “cheapest unit” lowest-price-at-lowest-time-of-day?
Now, what is the rate for the “last-added-kilowatt-hr” rate in the early evening when you plug in the electric scam (er, car)?
Tax, title, AND ALL “license fees” must be paid – your rate is too low to account for the price of an electric car.
Let me add: When the actual cost is more than double your initial claim, and when you don’t mention the cost of battery degradation, you’re a liar.
VikingExplorer
??
Their rates are unrealistic, dead wrong for the actual charge on every EXTRA kilowatt-hr above baseline.
Are you going to actually trust any .gov source in today’s Big Government dictatorship?
“Average rate” for the Basic Line rate for the “cheapest unit” lowest-price-at-lowest-time-of-day?
Now, what is the rate for the “last-added-kilowatt-hr” rate in the early evening when you plug in the electric scam (er, car)? Tax, title, AND ALL “license fees” must be paid – your rate is too low to account for the price of an electric car.
I am the numbers nerd from hell on EVs. I have one for curiosity’s sake, as opposed to EVangelism’s sake. The numbers cut both ways. I am absolutely death on fudged numbers. Electricity rates are very difficult to peg. They vary a lot. I wrote 12 cents above, but the best number is probably 12.6 cents for a U.S. average, although that seems suspiciously low to me.
http://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.cfm?t=epmt_5_03
Time of day rates are especially difficult to interpret, because the typical rate schedule charges much higher peak rates. I think — but do not claim to know — that the typical TOD user doesn’t save anything on his total bill. It would be interesting to know.
Tax, title, etc. are paid on all vehicles, so I don’t get your point in raising the issue for EVs. Finally, I’m not promoting EVs. I have definite views on that issue, which boil down to this: EVs will cost more than the equivalent ICEV, even with the tax credits. No one should buy an EV to save money, unless they have some special situation, an example being a woman who told me that her landlord had installed solar panels and allowed her to charge her EV for free.
But that example is a special one. If the numbers could be extracted and compared, I doubt the EV purchase would be less than a gas car. My point in my postings in this thread is to be as factual as possible. The EVangelists drive me nuts, but so do at least some of the ax-grinding anti-EV types here. To me, they are just cars, not causes.
Jake J,
You are a very obnoxious reactionary and are putting words into my mouth. I clearly said my calculations for operating costs, therefore I’ve used my own electricity costs. It would be foolish of me to make a decision based on someone else’s fuel costs. Battery degradation isn’t an operating expense, it’s a repair expense.
>> The EVangelists drive me nuts
You don’t know me very well if you’ve concluded that I’m an electric car evangelist. Perhaps a bit like you (minus the obnoxious ad-hominem), I’m reacting to the “ax-grinding anti-EV types here”. Maybe you should read all my comments in this thread before you go spouting off like a crazy lunatic liar.
You are a very obnoxious reactionary
Well bless your heart!
I clearly said my calculations for operating costs, therefore I’ve used my own electricity costs. It would be foolish of me to make a decision based on someone else’s fuel costs. Battery degradation isn’t an operating expense, it’s a repair expense.
Battery degradation would be an operating expense, same as, say, tire wear. It’s 4 cents a mile. And where are you living that charges only 10 cents/kWh?
And Bless you Jake J. And how is your wonderful family? All the best to you and yours.
Is tire wear normally included in MPG? 🙂
>> And where are you living that charges only 10 cents/kWh?
What, you can’t find anywhere in the US with lower rates? You must be itching to call me a liar. You are all knowing, and it’s certainly not possible that there are areas of the country with deregulated electricity markets, where it’s possible to choose from various generation companies that are competing with each other on price alone.
I pay a higher rate for each 1000 kW-h after the first one.
And then there are the other charges on the bill…customer charge, taxes, etc.
Rates do vary from place to place, commercial to residential, amount used, etc.
Please explain. how is “Source: FuelEconomy.gov” your “calculations”
Grey, web site gave me range and kWh and I used my own electricity cost. Here are the Corrected calculations.
Original source: FuelEcon
Isn’t the battery swap by invitation only?
Nothing wrong with the use of Diesel Generators.
The real problem is the fact that our lands have been flooded with retards, opportunists, parasites, criminals, thieves and power hungry demagogues.
Those are problems. Maybe the tide will wash them all out to sea one of these elections?
Although electric cars powered off the grid may or may not have lower emissions (depending on your local mix of source), many Tesla owners put in solar charging systems. And the charging stations mostly run off solar.
I have to laugh when I see people griping that Tesla’s don’t make sense economically and are purchased as status symbols. If people suddenly stopped buying cars as status symbols, Tesla would have a lot of company in Chapter 11.
Mike, rich people do lots of expensive things that have no broader application to anyone or anything.
So to get your true Tesla value, you need to buy a solar recharge system?
They might want to rethink that recharging system thing if they commute to work. After returning from work they’d have a limited solar window for charging. On the other hand, Teslas are expensive toys to be enjoyed not used for practical purpose.
It is true people buy cars as status symbols, but when they do they do not claim to do so for higher moral purpose, saving the planet, saving the future or other pompous nonsense.
Alx, so you know, my EV gets lots of attention, partly because I outfitted it with a set of steer horns. I make a point of telling people that I bought it out of a bankruptcy sale of the maker; that I have a gigantic diesel pickup for road trips and hauling; and that I got the EV not to save the earth but just for the hell of it. I despise eco-smugness. Seattle, where I live, overflows with that kind of thing. Ugh.
p.s.: I also tell people that, when you throw everything into the mix, they will not save any money with an electric car.
http://i.imgur.com/ahNkZyx.jpg
They may have purchased solar charging stations, but if they had to rely on those stations to charge their cars, they would be lucky to drive them once a week.
Those solar stations may be providing 1% of the power being used, and that’s being generous.
Mark W, solar power provides 0.44% of U.S. electricity.
http://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/pdf/sec7_5.pdf
how do you solar charge 85kwhrs?
With a 1000 m^2 bank of panels. That would be approximately 100′ x 100′ and would be enough to charge your Tesla in one sunny day. So, with your vast wealth you build a 10,000 sq ft garage to keep your Tesla out of the sun. Then you spend around a million $ to cover the entire roof with solar panels to charge it. And there you go! The ridiculousness of the whole scenario is truly mind boggling. It works great if you’re Tony Stark. For the rest of us it’s a complete joke.
So really what is the point of this article. A lot of alleges no inquiry. No nothing – The genset has wheels on it indicating that it is probably temporary – It takes time to build infrastructure. It takes time to get attached to the grid. Even at that – Diesel stationary (any stationary plant) more efficient than a car. I hate luddites.
Ray Gillies
You are wrong.
It takes hours to hook up to the grid in modern cities. Takes longer to get the appointment to start an account to pay for the electricity.
A diesel-on-a-cart is just about the same efficiency as a gas-engine-in-highway driving. (Diesel efficiency is slightly higher in stop-and-go city driving) The steady purr of a diesel is more efficient – but the diesel-to-AC-to-DC-to-battery-charger-to-chemical-energy-in-batteryback-from-chemical-energy-in-battery-back-to-DC-back-to-dc-motor-back-to-driving-wheels means … You lose.
He gets money, power, influence, publicity. The rest of us lose.
When you look at the total energy consumption, electrics are less efficient than ICs. Sorry dude, you’ve been sold a lie.
As to your claim that the diesel generator is more efficient than a car, is there any idiocy you won’t believe?
No idea about the context, and this is just an off the cuff calculation. It’s well known that the approximate thermal efficiency of a hypothetical diesel is about 50%, while a gasoline engine is about 30%. Adding a generator to the diesel reduces it by only 10%, bringing it down to 45%. Lithium Ion batteries are also efficient, say 85%, which brings it down to 38 %. The next drop is the DC motor which is about 90%, which brings us down to 34%. Well, 34% > 30%, so Ray seems more correct.
[“volts” = “Water pressure” is good, but “amps” = “Water flow” (rather than than “diameter”) is a more accurate analogy.
“Volume” and “kilowatt-hrs” is good. .mod]
I didn’t invent the explanation that you corrected, but I’d have to dispute you. I’d say that watts = water flow, i.e. total water volume running through the hose. Increase the pressure (volts) or the amps (diameter), and water flow will be greater. But I’m not an electrical engineer, so maybe there’s a better way to say it.
I am not challenging your veracity by telling you the following, but, your arguments/assertions would gain much strength if you cited reliable sources for your information (the credibility of “Jake, expert witness on electric cars” has been established elsewhere, no doubt (smile), but here on WUWT it has not been).
It would help a whole lot if you’d tell me what you need sources for. I really didn’t think I needed to post links about the charger specifications, for example. I can source anything you want, but didn’t include footnotes here because I figured it’d just clutter things up. But I’ll give sources for whatever you think needs sourcing.
Jake, you still have not answered my questions on costs if you add subsidies and the lack of a gasoline tax into your costs what do the numbers look like compared to a gasoline-powered car. Conversely, you could take the amount of electric car subsidies and gas taxes off the costs of the gasoline powered car. Taxes and subsidies are also facts.
Funny you should ask, because I have all those numbers. I completely agree about taxes and subsidies being facts. Oh God, do I ever agree! As with my answer just above, I’ve been trying to be careful not to do such a data dump that everyone’s eyes glaze over and the points get lost. I’ll look through what you’ve written and see if there’s something to reply to. At this point, I’m not exactly certain what you are looking for. Suffice to say that I calculate the EV-vs.-gas car numbers with and without taxes and subsidies. It’s a very big issue with me.
I am an EE, so maybe I’ll try, But analogies are always imperfect. If a gallon of water was like a Joule, gallons per minute is like a Watt. Water pressure is like Voltage, water speed is like Current, where watts/voltage = current, and hose diameter was like Resistance.
Probably more confusing than it was worth.
He ignores capital costs. You pay three times for a Tesla compared to an equivalent petrol car
Probably more confusing than it was worth.
Yep, sure was.
I prefer the waterfall analogy. The height of the fall represents voltage, the amount of water flowing the amps. Then it is clear that you could stand under a high fall with little water flow and have no problem, but even a low fall with a great amount of water flowing will wipe you out. High voltage and little amperage is…exciting (?)…but high amperage even at low voltage, deadly.
As an undergrad I was doing some spectrographic analysis. Those who research light are always in the dark, and in aligning the equipment I managed to grab hold of a 5000 volt lead (I’m pretty sure that’s right. It’s been a long time). Whoa, Nellie, that was a surprise. Low amps or I wouldn’t be around.
Jake J,
Better than your extremely flawed analogy. Watt hour is consumption per hour? Watt-hour is energy (Joule). Power (Watt) is energy per unit time, or joules per second. By adding per hour, You’ve made energy equivalent to power.
If power is like speed, energy is like position.
So, with your analogy, if someone asked you “where are you?” Your answer would be “25 mph”.
Your analogy is also flawed because it misses the relationship between power, voltage and current. For the same power, increasing the voltage will reduce the current.
However, for the same water volume, increasing the pressure will not change the diameter.
Please tell me Grey, what is an equivalent ice car? I think that unlike other evs, it stands alone,
Except that a gallon of water is not like a joule. A gallon of water is like a coulomb. Gallons of water per minute will give you a volumetric flow rate, which is analogous to an electric current. Multiply the volumetric flow rate by the pressure drop (which is like the voltage drop through a resistive element) and you get the power required.
Except a gallon of water is NOT like a coulomb. These kind of analogies are useless. It’s easier just to learn about electrical concepts.
I’ll thank you to not get snippy with me when you’re the one who introduced the idea of a unit of volume being analogous to a unit of energy.
And, for the record, energy is proportional to the product of volume and pressure, just like it’s proportional to the product of charge and potential.
Luddites? What jobs exactly are being threatened by diesel generators running electric cars? Actually don’t see any jobs threatened from fossil fuels generating the electricity required to recharge electric cars either.
It does take time to build infrastructure, so what? If it is worth the time, money and benefit, like let’s say gas stations, highways, airports, electric grids, cell phone towers etc then it happens. Luddites have never been able to stop or even slow progress. Even ideologues adept at gaining positions of power but inept at providing achievable benefit cannot stop progress. Like life itself, progress happens, it just happens.
Whether everyone or no one will be driving electric cars 100 years from now, I have no idea. The next 100 years will be as surprising and unpredictable as the last 100 years.
Alx, I think you and Ray agree. Luddites here is not about jobs lost, but rather about being anti technology.
Remember the lawnmowers that were introduced last summer? The ones that run on grass clippings?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2548784/Now-thats-GREEN-energy-Robotic-lawnmower-uses-grass-cuts-FUEL.html
Anyone here seen one?
http://www.nicholasville.org/images/pic_mower_in_tall_grass.jpg
It takes it 3 weeks to cut the average lawn, so, well,… the grass won.
🙂
As Jake J (electric car owner “just for the hell of it” — and GOOD FOR YOU, Jake — THAT is about the only bona fide reason to own one … hope your toy gives you joy 🙂 ) admitted above, electric cars are not ready for prime time.
And they are most CERTAINLY NOT READY FOR THE RACE TRACK (so what if they can win on a drag strip — BIG WHOOP, lol).
Driver: “Okay, guys. Now, how many laps did you say I can do before I have to come in for a charge?….. ONE?!! We’ll NEVER win!…. Huh? Oh. We’re only racing against other electric cars? (big sigh of relief).
*****************************************************
And, lol, while many (most?) who buy them do so to impress their neighbors with their “Holy Car” (holy because it is not as “harmful to the environment”),
electric cars are NET COST in the “holiness” department.
“…environmentalists … champion subsidies for companies selling electric cars and tax credits for people buying them.”
“… most electric-car assessments analyze only the charging of the car. This is an important factor indeed. But a more rigorous analysis would consider the environmental impacts over the vehicle’s entire life cycle, from its construction through its operation and on to its eventual retirement at the junkyard.”
“The materials used in batteries are no less burdensome to the environment, the MIT study noted. Compounds such as lithium, copper, and nickel must be coaxed from the earth and processed in ways that demand energy … .”
“National Academies’ assessment {http://www.nap.edu/catalog/12794/hidden-costs-of-energy-unpriced-consequences-of-energy-production-and } didn’t ignore those difficult-to-measure realities. It drew together the effects of vehicle construction, fuel extraction, refining, emissions, and other factors. In a gut punch to electric-car advocates, it concluded that the vehicles’ lifetime health and environmental damages … are actually greater than those of gasoline-powered cars.”
{And don’t bet your money (unless it’s with the OPM that currently subsidizes the contrived market share and “profits” of Tesla via artificially lowered Cost of Production) on a BREAKTHROUGH in technology …}
“… electric-car technology is still quite young, so it should get much better. But don’t expect batteries, solar cells, and other clean-energy technologies to ride a Moore’s Law–like curve of exponential development. Rather, they’ll experience asymptotic growth toward some ultimate efficiency ceiling. When the National Academies researchers projected technology advancements and improvement to the U.S. electrical grid out to 2030, they still found no benefit to driving an electric vehicle.”
(Source: “Unclean at Any Speed,” Ozzie Zehner (author of book Green Illusions) http://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/renewables/unclean-at-any-speed )
*******************************************
Note: As has been stated several times above, this is simply a rich person’s toy (and “holiness” hypocrisy); you will NEVER recoupe your investment (i.e., the price of car (and maintenance) over its expected lifetime is never outweighed by fuel cost savings, esp. given time value of money)).
Janice, I laugh at EVangelists. I also laugh at the over-the-top detractors. If — and it’s a very big “if” and certainly a future “if” — someone develops a battery that’s far cheaper and far more energy-dense than lithium, then EVs will be the mainstream vehicle of choice.
In theory, they make the most sense for one simple and very powerful reason: An EV is 4 to 6 times as thermally efficient as its gas or diesel counterpart. This is fact, not politics. The problems now are with cost and performance, the latter basically being range. These are formidable problems, and I don’t see how lithium chemistry can overcome them.
Gasoline is a tough, tough competitor. Pound for pound, gasoline has 140 times the energy density of a fully charged lithium battery. Even when we take into account the fact — not political, just true — that an EV system gets 3-1/2 times the equivalent range per unit of energy, gasoline still offers 40 times the range per pound of fuel.
In the real world: My EV’s battery weighs 660 pounds and will take the car 80 miles, on a year-’round average basis. (More in summer, less in winter.) That same weight of gasoline will take the equivalent gas car 3,200 miles. Currently, EV owners “solve” this by refueling much more often. This can work in the city, but not on the road, Tesla’s “supercharger” claims notwithstanding.
The average EV charger will download enough power to add 0.6 to 1.2 miles of range per minute of charging. Tesla “superchargers” are more powerful, and will download 5.6 miles of range per minute, according to company specs — actual owners often say the real performance is less, but you’re about to see that precision doesn’t matter on this one. A gas or diesel pump runs at 5 gallons a minute. My diesel pickup gets 16.5 mpg on the road, which is 82.5 miles of range added per minute of refueling. The average small car gets 28 mpg combined city and highway, or 140 miles of added range per minute of refueling.
EVangelists try to spin the need for frequent refueling as a positive, arguing that people taking road trips would enjoy cooling their heels for 45+ minutes every 175 miles. Ha!
And then there is battery cost. The battery is the gas tank, and today’s EV gas tanks go for about $300/kWh, and the typical EV has a gas tank of 20 kWh-30kWh. Tesla’s Model S gas tank is 85 kWh in the popular version. These costs are coming down, and we can expect them to be $200/kWh by the early ’20s, and maybe bottoming out at $150/kWh. That’s a very expensive tank, and it will keep EVs more expensive than ICEVs unless and until there’s a big breakthrough that goes far beyond mere manufacturing economies of scale.
Everything I’ve just written is fact. There is room to quibble and nibble around the edges about some of the numbers, but none of it will be even remotely material to the underlying point, which is that EVs are not and will not be ready for prime time unless and until we get a big, game-changing battery breakthrough. The most we’ll see is that EVs might make inroads into the second-car city commuter market, but only if they are heavily subsidized, and/or gasoline is heavily penalized.
“An EV is 4 to 6 times as thermally efficient as its gas or diesel counterpart.”
That’s only true if you examine only the cars themselves. The advantage disappears completely when you take it back to the source of the energy.
Say, Jake, I was just doing a little research on range (miles per charge) of electric cars…
Every __ miles (some fairly high, around 200 miles, others much lower), the average charge time seemed to be around 4.5 hours.
Please explain to me this statement you made:
“… enjoy cooling their heels for 45+ minutes every 175 miles.”
Approximately 45 minutes battery charge time seems a bit misleading (without explanation/cite to sources, I mean).
You are pretty optimistic about future cost of batteries. I don’t share your opinion.
Regardless, what happens to the price of those batteries if the demand for lithium were to double or triple?
Janice, I’m going to answer your question. As I do, it might sound like I am an EVangelist. I assure you I am not. In fact, I’ve been banned from all kinds of EVangelist sites for my stubborn insistence on not doing anything other than telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth about electric cars. You see, I am a numbers guy like crazy, and I am death on numbers manipulation.
So, with that:
1. EVs are all about the batteries. Tesla’s cars are distinguished mainly by the large size (and high cost) of their batteries. The most popular version of their Model S has an 84 kWh battery, which is 3-1/2 times the capacity of Nissan’s LEAF, which has a 24 kWh battery.
2. There are several varieties of chargers. The most common is a “Level 2” unit. A Level 2 charger operates at 240 volts. Some of them operate at 14 amps and others operate at 28 amps. Amps (x) volts = watts. My EV’s 14 amp Level 2 charger operates at a peak rate of (3,360 watts) 3.36 kW. Charging cycles build up to the peak, and scale down from it. On average, my Level 2 charger will download 3 kWh worth of juice in each hour of charging, which is enough to run my vehicle for 10 miles. Break that down to minutes, and my car recharges at a rate of 0.6 miles of range per minute of charging.
3. The newer non-Tesla EVs, i.e., the LEAFs now being sold, use a 28 amp Level 2 charger at home. They charge at double the rate I just mentioned, or a peak of 6.6 kW. In practice, this will average out to 6 kW over a charging cycle, averaging 1.2 miles of range uploaded per minute. These ranges will vary a bit depending mainly on the time of year. EV fuel economy is much lower in winter, and somewhat higher in summer. The numbers I’m citing here are year-’round averages.
4. There are more powerful chargers out there: “DC” chargers will download at average rates throughout a charging cycle of about 40 kW, which translates to about 2.2 miles of range added per minute. The new LEAFs can accommodate DC charging. People don’t typically put a DC charger in their garage, because they’d need 480 volt service (i.e. two electric dryer circuits), each running 80-85 amps. That means lots of rewiring, city inspections, and — I assume — punishing charges from the electric company. Not only that, but it’d be overkill for a house, given that most EV owners are content to plug the sucker in at 8 p.m. and let it go all night if needed.
5. Tesla claims that its “superchargers” will run at peak rates of 135 kW, and provide 170 miles of range in 30 minutes of charging. This would be 5.67 miles of range per minute. Actual owners of Teslas comment in forums that the real-world charge rates are slower than that. I believe the voltage is the same 480 used by DC chargers, but with much higher amperage. I would guess that many charging rates are slower because only some of the “superchargers” are the top-powered ones. But, for purposes of analysis, I’m happy to assume that they are all top-powered.
6. A side note. I had to do a lot of learning about basic electric terms when I got my car. Think of a garden hose. “Volts” is the water pressure.”Amps” is the hose diameter. “Watts” is the total water volume. A “watt hour” refers to consumption over each hour. Thus, 1 kWh is the amount of electricity that will power a 1,000 watts for one hour.
7. Another side note. People often talk in terms of total battery capacities and vehicle ranges. In real life, an EV owner is told not to habitually use more than 80% of the battery’s capacity, and not to “top up,” i.e., refill if the battery is pretty full, say, 60% or 70% or more. These behaviors accelerate battery degradation. It’s why, for example, the batteries on cellphones and computers crap out so quickly. People plug them in when they’re almost full, or let them drain completely. EV owners know how expensive batteries are, and most of us are quite careful about that 80% rule.
So, when you see an EV “range” quoted, multiply it by 80%. And then you’ll have an [average] practical range on a year-’round basis. However, in a nice summer, i.e., up to about 85 or 90 degrees in the shade, you’ll do 20% better. In winter, you’ll do about one-third worse, because batteries in general don’t like the cold, and because the same battery that turns the wheels powers the heater. Batteries also don’t like extreme heat, and they power the air conditioner. Therefore, “range” is a moving target to a much greater degree than in a gas car.
—-
So, hopefully you can see that the time it takes to recharge an EV is going to depend on the size of the battery, the power of the charger, and the car’s ability to handle whatever amount of electricity the charger can throw at it. (My EV, for example, can’t handle any more than a lower-powered Level 2 charger, while never EVs can handle higher power levels. Tesla designed its cars from the start to handle relatively high recharge levels.)
Also, you can see that a calculator comes in handy, and that everything has to be triple checked. I am quite certain that I’ve done the triple checking. I hope this helps. Everything I have written is factual, supported both by research and direct and careful observation by someone who’ll have owned his EV for three years come this fall.
[“volts” = “Water pressure” is good, but “amps” = “Water flow” (rather than than “diameter”) is a more accurate analogy.
“Volume” and “kilowatt-hrs” is good. .mod]
You are pretty optimistic about future cost of batteries. I don’t share your opinion. Regardless, what happens to the price of those batteries if the demand for lithium were to double or triple?
It’s not my opinion. It comes from McKinsey & Co., the strategic consultancy. As for lithium, I believe (but could be wrong) that it’s not in short supply, or too difficult to get. I think the much bigger issue has been so called “rare earth elements.” I don’t think lithium is a long-term winner because of its low energy density. I think I’ve read that the use of rare earth elements per kWh of capacity is dropping.
By the way, I answered you about thermal efficiency below, so I won’t repeat it right here.
Dear Jake J.,
Thank you for taking the time to respond to my question.
I am not challenging your veracity by telling you the following, but, your arguments/assertions would gain much strength if you cited reliable sources for your information (the credibility of “Jake, expert witness on electric cars” has been established elsewhere, no doubt (smile), but here on WUWT it has not been).
Your ally for science truth,
Janice
Jake. Did your cost calculations include or exclude the subsidies for seller and buyer. And, you may pay some taxes but not a road use tax such as the federal and state gas taxes. Include the subsidies and tax-free use of roads costs/gains in a straightforward manner. Then give us the costs per mile again including subsidies and lack of gasoline taxes in the costs.
P.S. (Jake) Your telling me so many simple things above (under the assumption that I am quite ignorant of a lot of basic knowledge — and that’s fine, Jake, if I come off as kind of slow, thank you for making sure I would understand by telling me such things) — made me realize I need to clarify my request for cites to sources above: only for specialized information which is not easily ascertainable within a fairly quick time. Sorry for that apparently ridiculous request for cites for the basic info.!
Your telling me so many simple things above (under the assumption that I am quite ignorant of a lot of basic knowledge — and that’s fine, Jake, if I come off as kind of slow, thank you for making sure I would understand by telling me such things) — made me realize I need to clarify my request for cites to sources above: only for specialized information which is not easily ascertainable within a fairly quick time. Sorry for that apparently ridiculous request for cites for the basic info.!
Nothing personal — no assumptions — on this end. Long ago, I was trained to try to write clearly and in non-jargon English. These days, I really don’t know how to write any other way. One byproduct is that I tend to write long. I’ve tried boiling it down, but is sacrifices readability to do that. In any case, I’m happy to supply sources for anything you think needs it.
MarkS, did you read my MIT link on battery technologies?
EV users never account for the many inefficiencies encountered in getting their power from the coal plant to the charger in their car.
When you compare total energy usage from mine/oil well to wheel, electric vehicles lose.
BTW, they’ve been building electric cars longer than they have been building IC cars. Electrics and steamers were the first cars on the road.
The charging are basic power electronics, nothing fancy and they are quite a ways down that learning curve.
There may be a bit more efficiency to squeeze out of the power management between the battery and the wheels, but not much.
EV users never account for the many inefficiencies encountered in getting their power from the coal plant to the charger in their car. When you compare total energy usage from mine/oil well to wheel, electric vehicles lose.
That’s just not true. And before you write me off as some earth-savin’ EVangelist, please try to glance at my other posts in this thread. I’m a facts guy, and will let the chips fall where they may.
I have done a lot of research on the issue you raise. It’s impossible for me to go back farther than the power plant (for electricity) or the refinery (for gasoline). The numbers probably exist, but the dimensions of the research from mine/well to power plant/refinery are too daunting. However, from power plant to outlet, and refinery to pump — those numbers are readily available, as are the numbers all the way to the car wheels.
I’m going to give you numbers, but before I do so I will tell you this: I’m applying a basic accounting principle — materiality — as I do so. Which is to say that some quibbling is possible, but not to materially change the picture. Anyone who’s an accountant or who (like me) suffered through some accounting classes on the way to a different objective will understand and appreciate the materiality principle.
Gasoline’s thermal efficiency is in the low 20% range. This includes (mainly) the heat lost through the tailpipe, and the roughly 10% inefficiency in the refining process. Electricity’s thermal efficiency is about double that — the low 40% range — at the current mix of U.S. fuels used to generate it. As an aside, about 6-1/2% of electricity is lost in transmission; for purposes of analysis, I set that equal to the “transmission” loss of getting gasoline from the refinery to the filling station. In other words, I eliminated that factor on both sides of the equation. In reality, I don’t know how much diesel is used to power the trucks that haul gasoline or how much other fuel is used to ship gasoline long distances by pipeline, if that’s even done.
Once you fill up an EVs battery, and fill up its gas-powered equivalent, an EV will go (on average) 3-1/2 times as far on the same amount of energy. Thus, if my EV’s gas counterpart gets 32 mpg, I can expect my EV to get 112 “mpg” when you use the gas-to-electric energy conversion formula that sets a gallon of gasoline equal to about 34 kWh of electricity, and vice-versa. And, wouldn’t you know it, my EV is almost exactly 3-1/2 times as fuel efficient as its gas counterpart in real life. I measure all of this about every four days, which is how often I typically refill my EV.
This makes my EV roughly 7 times as thermally efficient as its gas powered counterpart. If the counterpart was diesel, the multiple would be between 4 and 5. This is simply factual, not political. There are three other major reasons why EVs are not yet ready for prime time. They are: the cost of lithium batteries, their low energy density compared to gasoline, and the painfully slow recharge rates even at Tesla’s hilariously misnamed “superchargers.”
I’m not a chemist, but the stuff I’ve read from chemists strongly suggests that lithium batteries will not solve the first two problems. And if they can’t solve those, then the third problem becomes largely irrelevant. Thus, I expect battery-powered cars to remain in a small niche, pending development of a much cheaper and much more energy-dense battery. However, I quite strongly dispute the idea that battery powered cars are less fuel efficient than gas- or diesel-powered counterparts. The direct opposite appears factual to me.
Jake J,
“a gallon of gasoline equal to about 34 kWh of electricity, and vice-versa”
But that is not right. A gallon of gasoline gives you about 34 kWh of thermal energy. To generate 34 kWh of electricity you need in the neighborhood of 85 kWh of thermal energy, assuming 40% generating efficiency.
“Thus, if my EV’s gas counterpart gets 32 mpg, I can expect my EV to get 112 “mpg” “.
The latter should be 55 mpg, where the ‘gallon’ is the equivalent thermal energy of a gallon of gas, taking into account the 40% efficiency of generating electricity. The 20% efficiency of a gasoline engine is already incorporated into the mpg figure.
“This makes my EV roughly 7 times as thermally efficient as its gas powered counterpart”.
More like 1.7 times as efficient. Which is a little better than a hybrid, I think.
I like that you are data driven and check the numbers yourself, but you also have to get the math and physics right.
A gallon of gasoline gives you about 34 kWh of thermal energy. To generate 34 kWh of electricity you need in the neighborhood of 85 kWh of thermal energy, assuming 40% generating efficiency.
Hmm, interesting. I have to give that one some thought. By the way, a hybrid is more efficient than pure gas because of the electric component.
MikeM,
Without going through a detailed analysis, I think your numbers look more plausible than Jake Js. I would like to point out that it’s a very complicated question.
For example, us grid power is about half ng and nuclear. This makes it difficult to measure efficiency. Only 5% is oil, because it’s expensive. Yet, the ic is burning something more expensive than oil.
In fact, I think joule efficiency from source to miles driven is an interesting science problem, but irrelevant analysis.
Your right that for certain power plants, it takes 85 to generate the 34. However, it also takes energy to refine and deliver a gallon of gasoline to somewhere near us. Also, ic requires extra trips (4 times/month) plus time spent. Electricity is delivered to our homes.
The best way is to measure $/mile and let the market figure out the details. Unfortunately, politics distorts the market in many ways. Oh well, life isn’t fair. Its not all favoring evs though. With enough power plants, electricity would probably be around 8 cents / kWh. Driving at that rate is about 1/3 the cost, while factoring in longer commutes probably brings it up to 2/3 of the cost.
I found a detailed analysis.
It shows that the well-to-wheel efficiency of an ICE is about 14%, whereas it’s about 30% for an EV.
This shouldn’t have come as a surprise to anyone, unless you have some irrational bias against electrical technology.
The key is understanding that thanks to Nikola Tesla and Edison a long time ago, it’s really efficient to deliver energy right to your home.
I have gone back and forth on the correct thermal efficiency multiplier for EVs. I started at the 3-1/2 x mpg-e for EVs, and have looked at the generation efficiencies from a couple different angles. I’m going to look at this again later, but I’m thinking that a 2-3x multiple is probably most accurate. It’s one of the more challenging questions surrounding EVs.
“… electric-car technology is still quite young”
130 years old is young?
Yeah, Gamecock, I raised my eyebrows at that one, too, but I figured Zehner knows what he’s talking about, there. I’d like to hear an informed response to your question myself. Seems like now the electric car industry is basically praying for a miracle… and in the meantime, doing a GIANT P.R. campaign to keep things going…
Where do you get 130 years from? I make it ~180 years, and they still haven’t solved the problems electric cars had nearly two centuries ago.
IMHO, they will only really take off when telepresense makes long-distance travel a rarity, and anyone can design the short-range electric vehicle of their dreams in Adobe AutoShop and print it on the 3D printer at Home Depot.
Back when cell phones were using ‘bricks’ for batteries I worked in the industry and we researched battery technology. We concluded that after two hundred years of on-going research of batteries, improvements in reducing size and weight, or increasing energy density would be slow and incremental. It was; that was twenty-five years ago.
Between battery research for the military, cell phone industry, computer industry, and now EVs, it seems more and more doubtful that there is a major discovery to be made.
I have nothing against rich people throwing their own money away. It is when they take ours along with it that I bristle.
Why nobody uses the battery swap station: because the battery DOESN’T FIT!
https://twitter.com/AZComendador/status/604039414642249728
Replacing batteries in an EV is expensive. Luckily internal combustion engines never wear out. /sarc off
An EV battery is much more appropriately compared to a gas tank, not an engine. EVs have motors, and they do wear out, although to be fair they last longer than gas engines and are cheaper to replace.
No. It’s not. We aren’t talking about what part is analogous to what part. We are talking about cost of operation. What are the components that typically need replaced? What is their cost? On EV’s it’s the battery. That’s about it. It is very expensive, no doubt about that. But there’s not much else by way of cost or maintenance. The electric motor and drive unit will last a VERY long time. On ICE cars, it’s the engine and transmission. You also have the associated cooling system, alternator, brakes, cost of oil changes, etc.
We aren’t talking about what part is analogous to what part. We are talking about cost of operation. What are the components that typically need replaced? What is their cost? On EV’s it’s the battery. That’s about it. It is very expensive, no doubt about that. But there’s not much else by way of cost or maintenance. The electric motor and drive unit will last a VERY long time. On ICE cars, it’s the engine and transmission. You also have the associated cooling system, alternator, brakes, cost of oil changes, etc.
I’ve actually thought about all of this stuff, and calculated a lot of it. With ICEVs, depreciation covers the wearing out of engines, because they typically don’t need significant maintenance for more than 100,000 miles, and typically not replacement for much longer.
As for brakes, well, last time I checked, my EV has them too. It’ll be interesting to see how much wear the regen function deducts from them. When I’ve calculated battery replacement cost, I’ve used a net number. I started with McKinsey’s estimate of $200/kWh as of 2020. .(I might add that this is quite generous to the EV side of the equation, because McKinsey’s estimate is a cost number, not a replacement battery price.)
I assumed a 100,000-mile battery life for a LEAF-size battery, which is also quite generous given the actual experience being reported by lots of owners, not to mention that Nissan’s battery warranty doesn’t go that far. This yields a starting point of 5 cents a mile for the battery. From that, I deducted the costs of oil changes and exhaust system maintenance on an equivalent car — 1 cent per mile, or $1,000.
I’ve owned 16 vehicles in my adult life, and never once had to maintain or replace a tranny or an engine. Thus, as I explained above, I think any numbers linked to those issues would be covered by depreciation. I might note that in only one vehicle did I have to do exhaust work — well beyond the 100,000-mile mark. So, I think 4 cents a mile for the current EVs is in the ballpark, and probably too generous.
This will all change as batteries get bigger. Tesla’s batteries, for example, ought to last for 300,000 miles and maybe more, so I think that issue can be called ordinary depreciation rather than an operating cost component of depreciation. We’re going to see bigger lithium batteries in cars pretty soon, and when we do then I will be rethinking this component.
Just some information which MAY prove helpful (just FYI in case):
1. “… most experts agree a replacement hybrid car battery can range anywhere from $1,000 to more than $6,000, depending on the year and model of car, and without including dealership or independent labor costs.”
Source: http://auto.howstuffworks.com/fuel-efficiency/hybrid-technology/hybrid-battery-cost.htm
2. “The cost of a car engine … average price range is from $800 to $3,000. *** According to TheCarConnection.com article on replacing engines, the average {labor} cost of having an engine replacement can be roughly around $1,000 to $2,000.”
Source: http://www.howmuchisit.org/car-engine-cost-2/
*******************************************
Okay! Now, it’s your turn, Dr. Joice!
(speaking hypothetically only, here, i.e., I’m not challenging you to go out and find this info.):
1. What percentage of car owners ever replace their:
a. internal combustion engine/transmission
b. electric car’s battery
2. Average price of
a. ICE car
b. electric car
3. Tax/Regulatory Subsidies for Cost of Production (or for buyer incentives) for
a. ICE car
b. electric car
*
*
*
etc….
Well, you get the point. Many more factors than engine/tranny v. battery replacement need to be taken into consideration to make a meaningful comparison of ICE v. electric vis a vis mechanical capabilities, costs of production, initial buyer investment (price), and costs of operation and maintenance.
Bottom line:
If electric cars can’t make it on a level, free market, playing field… they need to pull over and figure it out and stop wasting taxpayers’ money.
It will be interesting to compare the resale values of an EV (both before and after a battery replacement) versus an ICE, after eight years and a hundred thousand miles. I suspect that will make for a clear economic winner.
Free markets are best. It may not hurt plug in hybrids like you think. This is because along with removing tax credits, we would remove all market distorting taxes as well.
A lease taking advatage of ev tax credits is avoiding paying a tax it should never have paid in the first place.
Bottom line is that the pih is less expensive to operate, and would be in a libertarian utopia as well.
Jake, you still have not answered my questions on costs if you add subsidies and the lack of a gasoline tax into your costs what do the numbers look like compared to a gasoline-powered car. Conversely, you could take the amount of electric car subsidies and gas taxes off the costs of the gasoline powered car. Taxes and subsidies are also facts.
I wish we lived in world where markets are free from government intervention, but we don’t. All we can do is vote and then live in world as it is, or move. Which technology would have won in a libertarian utopia is irrelevant.
Here in CA we have tiered rates. My regular household needs pretty much always max out my Tier 1 and Tier 2 usage. So if I purchased an EV, pretty much all of the charging would be at Tier 3 rates. That’s almost 30 cents per KWh including taxes. That’s $25 per full change for maybe 200 miles.
My neighbor has an EV but only because he can charge it for free every day at his workplace (i.e. subsidies). Of course, he has a sports car, SUV and a Mercedes sedan as well.
California has done this to themselves, by how they have voted. Given the population, this is crazy: Nuclear Power Plants
I agree, Viking. The jerks in D.C. need to open up the Yucca Mountain waste disposal site (and, even more should just let the nuclear power industry take care of the waste problem themselves via private enterprise/property — federal gov’t. does NOT need to be involved at all (except with basic health and safety regs.) so NUCLEAR POWER CAN ROCK AS IT TRULY DOES!!!
Thank you Mike Smith. If all your neighbours needed 85kwhr charges as well, do you have a ht supply to your homes?
Of course there are a lot of other factors to consider. I don’t believe you can just dismiss the cost of a new engine or transmission as “depreciation” on an ICE but not consider depreciation on an EV. My dad is a mechanic. LOTS of cars and trucks need new engines or a rebuild of the engine somewhere between 100,000-200,000 miles. Transmissions too. Anyone here ever own a 90’s Dodge truck?? Ha!!
The average price of ICE/EV is not apples to apples.
My Tesla has a 8 year/unlimited mileage warranty on the battery. Suppose I put 200,000 on it between now and then and it needs a new battery. Any ICE car I ever had would be worn out by then, and almost completely depreciates. So even if my battery dies a cold death at 8 years and 1 day, the car will be completely depreciated at that point anyway. However, being that is an EV, I can probably buy a new battery for it and drive it another 200,000. The $20,000 or whatever a battery costs at that point would probably be more than it would cost to replace the engine and transmission on an equivalent ICE car, but you get the mileage and maintenance savings extended, so a lot of that cost is recouped.
As for brakes, I drive almost exclusively with one pedal at this point. My brakes will last almost forever at the rate I use them.
“Suppose I put 200,000 on it between now and then and it needs a new battery. Any ICE car I ever had would be worn out by then, and almost completely depreciates.”
There was a Civic on another forum I used to read which had ~800,000 miles and was on its second engine. Plus, you could buy three or four Civics for the cost of one Tesla.
And, other than me, I don’t know anyone who’s ever replaced the engine in their car unless it failed under warranty (mine was a classic car a heck of a lot rarer than a Tesla). Most people just replace the whole car at that point, because it’s an antique and newer cars are much better.
Huh? I’ve replaced two engines.
Having worked in the Honda engine plant in Swindon, I can vouch for their reliabiity. All most all of the engine assembly is not touched by hand.
Repeated for emphasis: My dad is a mechanic. Translation: Yoir anecdotal report of one Civic going 800,000 miles doesn’t hold water against mountains of evidence of countless engines and transmissions failing and needing repair/replacement.
I’ve owned 16 cars in adult life and never replaced an engine or a tranny. Same is true of my parents and their cars of the 1950s, ’60s, and ’70s.
Tesla’s cars, i.e. Rolexes on wheels, are in a different category. No one ever bought a Tesla to save money. Nothing about your car should be included in any economy calculation. Rolling jewelry is fine, but it’s still jewelry. And if you think your brakes will last “forever,” I have a song for you.
I don’t believe you can just dismiss the cost of a new engine or transmission as “depreciation” on an ICE but not consider depreciation on an EV.
The Nissan LEAF has the worst depreciation record of any car in the United States, and has had it for several years. Part of this is a matter of the tax credit, but part of this is undoubtedly a matter of the LEAF’s disappointing battery longevity.
I got 317K out of a Saturn SL2, single automatic transmission. Mostly freeway driving and I worked at home during snow storms. 250K out of its predecessor, a Saab 900. 145K from its predecessor, a VW Rabbit. The latter two needed their manual transmissions replaced once each.
One reason I’ve never considered something like a Prius is that I’d wear out a battery pack. Or two.
“So even if my battery dies a cold death at 8 years and 1 day, the car will be completely depreciated at that point anyway.”
Depreciation is a tax thing and arranged to benefit its users. A depreciated vehicle should still be servicable for many years and many miles.
And BTW, I know my purchase was frivolous and I don’t claim to be saving the environment by driving it. Heck, I drive my 3/4 ton diesel as often as I do the Tesla. I’m no EVangelist. Haha!
Well, btw, Dr. Joice — I think frivolous spending is wonderful! It creates jobs and YOU EARNED IT. It’s YOUR money!
Enjoy driving (I sure do!)
Janice the Chevy Fan
#(:))
(The electric car industry, however, needs to be taken off the taxpayers’ back (we’re already barely keeping our eyes up and ahead on the road with the burden on our backs as it is!).)
P.S. You need a sports car, however…
Reblogged this on Head Space and commented:
Sums up the Expensive Irony of it all.
It seems Tesla may be trying to emulate the performance of failed electric car battery exchange business A Better Place.
Here in Australia we saw a former Victorian, Brumby Labor government, internet millionaire, whizz-kid Evan Thornley resigned from parliament back in 2008 in order to go to A Better Place a company offering PEV battery switching services, billed as a leader in the emerging electric car transformation. But the much heralded Better Place new dawn turned sour when Thornley, then Better Place CEO, was fired in 2013 not long before economic reality set in and the company went broke.
Janice,
Agreed! I’m against all subsidies. Of any kind. To any industry.
Electricity is cheap where I live though. Right about $0.07/kWh. So that is my justification.
🙂
Ah, I think we might have us a Canadian. A Quebecker (-ois?) to be more specific. Just a guess. How’d I do?
Jake,
You talking about me? Canadian? Wrong. Not even close actually. And I said my brakes will last almost forever. Not forever. Don’t change my words. Besides, I think almost anyone else who read that sentence would recognize it as hyperbole. But the fact remains, I won’t have to change my brakes for the lifetime of this car.
Jake, you do realize that if the average is 12, and many places are more than the average, there has to be places where it’s less than the average? Simple math, but you seem clueless, so I’d thought I’d give you hand.
You talking about me? Canadian? Wrong. Not even close actually.
I guessed that because Quebec gets 7 cents/kWh for electricity. Is your 7 cents/kWh a special EV rate or TOD rate of some kind? I really can’t think of anywhere in the U.S., other than a couple towns right smack next to the big dams on the Columbia River, that pay 7 cents or less.
Jason Joice, you say “Agreed! I’m against all subsidies. Of any kind. To any industry.” What about the huge subsidies to the medical industry? In the USA medical subsidies take two forms: Demand is artificially increased through insurance, medicaid/medicare, laws against self medicating, and requiring ER’s to treat regardless of ability to pay. Supply is artificially constrained by laws requiring MD credentials, for which there is very limited supply, in order to practice medicine (80% of medical issues could be handled with far less training). Medical is the most highly subsidized field of all! Congratulations on your gift from the government. Don’t for a second think that you have earned it without heavy subsidy.
Regardless of this video’s validity, the US still gets around 40% of its electrical energy from coal, and only about 2% (actual) from wind/solar, so Tesla cars really aren’t “saving the planet” from the ravages of 0.2C of CO2 induced warming since 1850….
For environmental and economic reasons (not because of the CAGW hoax), electric cars will eventually replace inefficient combustion engines.
I’ll personally hate to see the age of combustion-engine cars being phased out as I’m a recovering motorhead, and certainly appreciate the feelings equestrian aficionados had when they saw horses being replaced by “horseless carriages” at the turn of 20th century…
US still gets around 40% of its electrical energy from coal, and only about 2% (actual) from wind/solar
The U.S. gets 4.5% of its electricity from wind and 0.44% from solar, for a total of just under 4.9%.
http://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/pdf/sec7_5.pdf
Jake– There is a HUGE difference between claims and reality when it comes to calculating actual wind and solar’s contribution to total US energy output…
I’m familiar with the EIA numbers you posted. The devil is in the details.
Regardless, wind and solar are completely insane ways to produce grid-level power as Germany, Spain, UK and many other countries are unfortunately suffering through…
Please present your evidence that the EIA’s electricity generation data is wrong.
Jake. Did your cost calculations include or exclude the subsidies for seller and buyer. And, you may pay some taxes but not a road use tax such as the federal and state gas taxes. Include the subsidies and tax-free use of roads costs/gains in a straightforward manner. Then give us the costs per mile again including subsidies and lack of gasoline taxes in the costs.
I calculated operating cost. Acquisition cost and salvage value are separate. By the way, in Washington State, there is a $100 yearly EV tax intended to recapture lost gas taxes. Given the way gas taxes work, the state’s EV fee is 1.1 cents per mile for the average EV, which is driven an average of 9,000 miles a year. The equivalent gas car pays 1.9 cents a mile.
Given that the gas tax mechanism rewards higher fuel economy, if the EV fee were truly a gas tax recapture on the same basis, the rate would be half of what it is. Not only that, but Washington State would send one-third of it to the federal highway trust fund. But this is Washington State, whose “progressive” political class knows no restraint when it comes to greed for new taxes.
Still won’t give us the subsidy numbers and make a fair comparison between gasoline- powered cars and electric cars. Does your reluctance to make a fair comparison mean the electric cars are more expensive to operate?
Leonard, I am not withholding a thing. What “subsidy numbers” are you talking about?
Oh no fair. I wish I could have stayed at Harris Ranch for 45 minutes to several hours every time I drove through.
Now you can flaunt your money and make a shamelessly display of all the extra time you have, with one car.