Cost of Driving an EV

-
92b said:
Would you be in favor of the government artificially holding the price of electricity low if it were to promote security and economic growth of the nation and Benefit nearly every us citizens and endeavor? Imagine what that would do for the ev industry.
Click to expand...

There are several municipalities in NY State which do exactly that. They have run their own power companies for a century or more. Statute allows them to buy electricity at a wholesale rate, and they sell it at cost plus expenses. It's very attractive for folks living in those places to own EVs and have all home appliances, including heat and hot water, to be powered by cheap electricity. It's also a feature used to attract businesses.
https://www3.dps.ny.gov/W/PSCWeb.nsf/All/03627EFC626529EE85257687006F39CD
 
S'cuder said:
There are several municipalities in NY State which do exactly that. They have run their own power companies for a century or more. Statute allows them to buy electricity at a wholesale rate, and they sell it at cost plus expenses. It's very attractive for folks living in those places to own EVs and have all home appliances, including heat and hot water, to be powered by cheap electricity. It's also a feature used to attract businesses.
https://www3.dps.ny.gov/W/PSCWeb.nsf/All/03627EFC626529EE85257687006F39CD
Click to expand...
Didn't know that. I guess that could be used as a model to see what effect cheap electricity has on sales of ev.
 
Gearfinger said:
Can you imagine the pressure to "Privatize" those utilities?
Click to expand...

For the most part they exist because the private sector wasn't interested in the meager amount of business they would have realized during the push for electrification nearly a century ago. Most of the public operations are still small utilities run in small towns. Due to the low rates enjoyed by the residents, they aren't likely to give them up. Maybe for a monorail.
I know of an interesting story from those times. My family has land in New York that was payment to an ancestor for his service in the Revolution. It's in a valley cut out by glaciers long ago. My Mom still lives there, as does my brother and his family. Bordering that land is a State Forest. It's beautiful spot, great for hunting, with some pretty steep hills. When the rural electrification push was going through, the private utility doing the work didn't want to incur the expense and effort to run power lines to the farms that had been on those hills for almost 150 years. Some politicians got paid off, and through eminent domain they made it a State Forest, and threw the people off the land. A few came back, and picked up where they left off, living the only life they'd known. The state got wind of it, evicted them again, burned all the buildings, and killed what livestock the residents had managed to keep. That took care of that. All that's left now are a few foundations, small family cemeteries, and stone fence lines all overgrown with forest.
 
92b said:
Would you be in favor of the government artificially holding the price of electricity low if it were to promote security and economic growth of the nation and Benefit nearly every us citizens and endeavor? Imagine what that would do for the ev industry.
Click to expand...
In PA, we have the PUC, utilities have to present a request for increasing rates to them. That's natural gas, electricity etc. Some regions have odd grandfathered in deals that skew rates and limit competition despite the opening of retail between producers/generation & consumers. Never got an explanation how that was allowed, guess a legally binding deal that has no expiration.....
I think the major problem with that question is that, the former act wasn't "picking winners" for us when there was an established alternative that already met our needs, unlike today..
 
Killer6 said:
In PA, we have the PUC, utilities have to present a request for increasing rates to them. That's natural gas, electricity etc. Some regions have odd grandfathered in deals that skew rates and limit competition despite the opening of retail between producers/generation & consumers. Never got an explanation how that was allowed, guess a legally binding deal that has no expiration.....
I think the major problem with that question is that, the former act wasn't "picking winners" for us when there was an established alternative that already met our needs, unlike today..
Click to expand...
I think intentional or not it did pick motors over horses, the established alternative at that time. It may not seem like horses were a viable alternative viewing it through the lens of what we know about todays motor vehicle but at that time the nations economy revolved around the horses ability to move people and goods from one place to another. Breeding, trainning,equipping, buying, selling,veterinarians, blacksmiths, livery stables, it was a huge industry and the only game in town as far as personal transportation until the horseless carriage was invented. 150 years from now people might have a hard time imagining that todays ic motorcar was an established alternative.
 
92b said:
I think intentional or not it did pick motors over horses, the established alternative at that time. It may not seem like horses were a viable alternative viewing it through the lens of what we know about todays motor vehicle but at that time the nations economy revolved around the horses ability to move people and goods from one place to another. Breeding, trainning,equipping, buying, selling,veterinarians, blacksmiths, livery stables, it was a huge industry and the only game in town as far as personal transportation until the horseless carriage was invented. 150 years from now people might have a hard time imagining that todays ic motorcar was an established alternative.
Click to expand...
Your question was price controlling/subsidising, nobody was telling people they HAD to switch to motorcars in the mid '30's, they were all in by then. Nobody at that time were penalizing, placing restrictions on, or adding made up taxes on those horse dependent trades You cite.
And crude base/mineral oils had way more applications than just fueling competition for horses. It wasn't strictly directed at "replacing the horse". And the horse had, and still has, virtues that make it a valuable form of transportation in a number of situations. Nobody is telling ferriers to stop shoeing, trainers stop training, or restricting horsey flatulence/poo to penalize/discourage their use. Access to certain avenues is restricted, for the safety of the horse, & sanitary prudence..
 
70bigblockdodge said:
This is true, brake life is a plus. Being in the rust belt though I can see the rotors dissolving long before the pads wear out.
Click to expand...
So far, it hasn't been all that much different on the ones here in PA, largely dependent on frequency of use & enviroment of parking. Quality of material plays a larger part in rotor degradation, poor shows up quickly around here.
The oldest hybrids in the shop were about 11yrs old when I left, brake wear less, pad/bracket ways/rotor corrosion about on par w/the non-hybrid version of the same model.
 
Killer6 said:
Your question was price controlling/subsidising, nobody was telling people they HAD to switch to motorcars in the mid '30's, they were all in by then. Nobody at that time were penalizing, placing restrictions on, or adding made up taxes on those horse dependent trades You cite.
And crude base/mineral oils had way more applications than just fueling competition for horses. It wasn't strictly directed at "replacing the horse". And the horse had, and still has, virtues that make it a valuable form of transportation in a number of situations. Nobody is telling ferriers to stop shoeing, trainers stop training, or restricting horsey flatulence/poo to penalize/discourage their use. Access to certain avenues is restricted, for the safety of the horse, & sanitary prudence..
Click to expand...
The government subsidized the oil industry before the mid 30's. Yes crude/ mineral oil have many applications. Same can be said for electricity. While these subsidies may not be named the " tax against horses" there effect was the same. While not directly saying you have to switch to motor cars the balance is tipped just the same. Long before the mid 30's. The first years of a developing technology are the most important and a little help from the government can make or break these technologies.
 
Killer6 said:
Your question was price controlling/subsidising, nobody was telling people they HAD to switch to motorcars in the mid '30's, they were all in by then. Nobody at that time were penalizing, placing restrictions on, or adding made up taxes on those horse dependent trades You cite.
And crude base/mineral oils had way more applications than just fueling competition for horses. It wasn't strictly directed at "replacing the horse". And the horse had, and still has, virtues that make it a valuable form of transportation in a number of situations. Nobody is telling ferriers to stop shoeing, trainers stop training, or restricting horsey flatulence/poo to penalize/discourage their use. Access to certain avenues is restricted, for the safety of the horse, & sanitary prudence..
Click to expand...
By the way, thanks for not calling me a moron or stupid or some expletive just because we don't agree 100%. Even though you may be thinking it. lol.
 
92b said:
The government subsidized the oil industry before the mid 30's. Yes crude/ mineral oil have many applications. Same can be said for electricity. While these subsidies may not be named the " tax against horses" there effect was the same. While not directly saying you have to switch to motor cars the balance is tipped just the same. Long before the mid 30's. The first years of a developing technology are the most important and a little help from the government can make or break these technologies.
Click to expand...
The first decades of a developing technolgy. Most of the R&D on miracle-magnets, miracle-motors, & bombastic-batteries has been 40+ yrs in the making. And a lot of that has been in universities, MIT, etc. Not just by manufacturers. Lots of money has been given in those decades to support that research, including superconductors, as well as ICE refinements. That's not a bad thing, but a factual perspective.
 
LocuMob said:
Charging at home is the same cost as using your microwave. 7.5¢/kw hr. The telsa charging stations are 17.5¢/kw hr. You can get an 80% charge in twenty minutes. And a range of close to 300 miles. $7.50 to charge at home, $20 at a charging station. I pay more for that to go 300 miles with my gasoline powered car. Ingot the numbers from a guy I know who just bought a Tesla, the smaller one. He said he will use it in the winter, knowing he only needs to go 20 miles round trip. He said he bought it for the self driving technology, but he loves the car already. He does have other vehicles he uses, but the Tesla is the new Number 1 for him.
Click to expand...
Here in Georgia, if you are on the right plan, I only pay about 1.5c/kWh between 11pm amd 7am. That’s when my Tesla charges.
 
Garethw said:
Here in Georgia, if you are on the right plan, I only pay about 1.5c/kWh between 11pm amd 7am. That’s when my Tesla charges.
Click to expand...
I looked at my bill, I pay 13.4¢/kWh. The numbers I mentioned previously was what the Tesla owner said he paid. Different power companies, so those may be accurate for him.
 
j par said:
I was thinking one day they would just have an electric engine swap. Where it just bolts to your motor mounts and bolts to your transmission and you take your gas tank out and mount the battery instead...
Click to expand...

Ever checked out any of Rich Rebuilds on YT?

His earlier stuff I really enjoyed but don't watch much now as it's a bit more "entertainment" than I care for.

Gas to EV and EV to gas efforts. Kinda cool
 
mopowers said:
That's awesome! Can you program it to charge then, or do you have to physically plug it in then?
Click to expand...
You can set charging times on the car so it’s automatic. We tell it to be fully charged (or to a set limit, we usually do 80%) by 6am. You can also set a start time instead of an end time. It’s pretty smart.
 
It just gets plugged in when when we get home and the system handles starting and stopping charging as programmed.
 
Here's where I see the biggest issue:

Batteries degrade over time. Due to this fact, they'll need replaced on a regular basis. Not everyone is going to be able to afford a new battery. A new battery is comparable in price to a new car. One issue is going to be whether to buy a battery, or a new car. For those that can't buy either one, cheaper batteries will be present with lesser range and probably a longer charge time. I'm seeing a future of a lot of stranded motorists just because of these facts.

On another note, who wants to sit for 30 minutes at a charging station waiting for their car charge on a roadtrip?
Is this going to be the return of roadside attractions?
 
S'cuder said:
There are several municipalities in NY State which do exactly that. They have run their own power companies for a century or more. Statute allows them to buy electricity at a wholesale rate, and they sell it at cost plus expenses. It's very attractive for folks living in those places to own EVs and have all home appliances, including heat and hot water, to be powered by cheap electricity. It's also a feature used to attract businesses.
https://www3.dps.ny.gov/W/PSCWeb.nsf/All/03627EFC626529EE85257687006F39CD
Click to expand...
What’s the price per kWh?
 
Just to add my 2 cents going back and forth to work in the winter in Michigan lights on, defroster on high. Rear defogger on etc. How long in this environment is the battery going to last? I and let’s not forget to 20 mph drives because of the weather.
 
Standardized batteries (or a modular standardized system) solves a lot of the problems mentioned above.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top