By on October 26, 2021

With the volume having been turned down on just about every business sector imaginable, automakers have spent most of this year explaining how supply chain shortages are impacting production and making promises about electric vehicles. However, the rhetoric surrounding electrification has gotten so aggressive that it’s fast becoming another contentious issue, leading to vicious arguments as people square up to take sides. Part of this is due to the enterprising way in which zero-emission vehicles are being marketed and subsequently embraced by world leaders that don’t know jack about the manufacturing or the environment. Much of the discourse surrounding electrification (pro or con) lacks nuance and leads to businesses promising whatever they can in an effort to obtain your unquestioning belief.

For example, EVs are frequently promoted as boasting substantially lower operating costs due to there being no reliance on liquid fuel. Though finding the truth actually requires one to make a comparative analysis while taking into account how, where, and what you’re driving. There’s even a new study out from the Anderson Economic Group (AEG) attempting to determine the true savings of swapping to an EV where the researchers ultimately decided gasoline-powered cars were actually easier on the wallet. However, that likewise requires loads of clarifying context and conditional factors. 

But let’s start on the matter of bias.

For every iPhone-loving soy boy that flies off the handle when they hear someone besmirch the good name of EVs, there’s a toothless bumpkin ready to insult your masculinity for thinking there’s any enjoyment to be had with electrification. Your author’s only real beef with zero-emission vehicles is that they’re not technically zero emissions and have yet to reach economic parity with their combustion-dependent brethren. Though I do have to confess that there’s no EV on the market that could possibly facilitate my lifestyle, which includes extremely long-distance drives several times per month.

Anderson Economic Group may have biases of its own. The Michigan-based economic consulting firm (with ties to GM, Ford, and Honda) could have been hired to sully EVs, though it’s not represented by the CEO. Patrick Anderson owns a Porsche Taycan and seems to believe electrification is indeed a boon for the environment. While we’re dubious of any claims suggesting buying a weekend toy like the Taycan is actually helping to win the war on pollution, Mr. Anderson doesn’t come across as someone who outright despises EVs either.

“They are a wonderful driving experience. But at the same time, they’re an enormous burden in time and in energy in finding chargers and getting them charged,” he told Yahoo News while promoting the paper. “And you’re not really saving much in terms of charging costs … you may be paying more.”

From Yahoo:

A mid-priced internal combustion car that gets 33 miles per gallon would cost $8.58 in overall costs to drive 100 miles at $2.81 a gallon, the study found. But a mid-priced EV, such as Chevrolet Bolt, Nissan Leaf or a Tesla Model 3, would cost $12.95 to drive 100 miles in terms of costs that include recharging the vehicle using mostly a commercial charger.

On a yearly basis, assuming the mid-priced cars traveled 12,000 miles, it would cost $1,030 to drive an internal combustion car and $1,554 to drive an EV.

For luxury cars that get 26 miles per gallon and use premium gas at $3.25 a gallon, the cost to drive an internal combustion car 100 miles is $12.60. The cost to drive a luxury EV, such as a Taycan, Tesla Model S or X or Jaguar I-Pace, is $15.52 to travel 100 miles. That is using mostly commercial chargers.

“That’s apples to apples and includes the extra EV taxes, the commercial charging and the home charging and the allowance of driving to a gas station, which, for most Americans, is very short compared to driving to a commercial charger for an EV owner,” Anderson said.

But everything remains highly conditional, affected by numerous factors both within and beyond your control. For example, finding a fast charger in the middle of Iowa while you’re traversing unfamiliar territory can be a nightmare. But those who refuse to stray far from home can simply plug their vehicles in at home and bookmark nearby charging points as necessary. Anderson Economic Group seems aware of this fact and attempted to account for this by making sure it clarified that it accounted for the differences in cost between home charging (including the necessary hardware), commercial charging, tax rebates, and “deadhead miles” — the latter of which accounts for energy/money lost while hunting for a charging station.

Vehicle pricing was also taken into account, with researchers noting that EVs typically cost quite a bit more than their internal combustion counterparts (before government incentives). However less easily judged is the time/money lost while waiting for vehicles to charge and the fact that electricity prices vary significantly more than gasoline. Still, AEG claims it did its best to bring them under consideration before deciding that it technically costs a little more to run an electric vehicle.

Using Michigan fuel prices (which are typically a smidgen lower than the national average) AEG surmised that the “direct monetary cost to drive 100 miles in an internal-combustion (ICE) vehicle is between $8.58 and $12.60. EVs were calculated as occupying the space between $12.95 and $15.52 per 100 miles.”

But those averages were taken from a comparison that cited entry, mid, and luxury level internal combustion vehicles (all of which used commercial fueling) vs mid-to-luxury level EVs (one of which prioritized home charging). The obvious explanation is that most EVs sold do tend to carry around higher price tags. In fact, the cheapest EVs are in the mid-$30,000 range and the rest are inarguably luxury vehicles. But this doesn’t make for an apples-to-apples comparison. It’s likewise strange to think that someone would purchase an electric car and then spend most of their time not charging it at home. However, living in New York has shown me that there are a staggering number of Tesla owners who actually do park their vehicles on the street and recoup the brunt of their energy from dedicated commercial charging.

AEG likewise assumes that EV owners make more money than someone who buys an ICE. While this happens to be true, researchers attempt to account for this by linking the time wasted during charging to potentially lost wages. But they cannot pit EV drivers making an estimated $70,000 salary against the national average of $52,000 (or the median $34,250) per year and hope for a fair comparison. So it just bumped up everyone’s pay to the maximum, perhaps foolishly. Worse yet, it assumes that the minutes lost every day to EV charging impacts time you could have spent working — resulting in a secondary expense for high-earners that probably don’t get charged by the hour anyway.

That all makes it seem as if the study is anti-EV propaganda to counter the pro-EV propaganda coming out of the industry. But things are again presumably more complicated than that. AEG made it clear that it tried to sample the market organically and ended up getting survey respondents and study data pertaining more toward people that owned Porsche and Tesla products than someone who picked up a secondhand Chevrolet Bolt. Charging data was also amassed from energy companies like ChargePoint and online forums where people have a tendency to gripe about worst-case scenarios. Meanwhile, home charging was given less priority due to it being harder to source reliable data.

However, that played a major factor in the study. Truth be told, most EV owners have told me that they don’t actually feel like they’ve saved any money using commercial chargers and find the changing rates frustrating. But those gripes usually dissipate when you encounter someone who doesn’t rack up a lot of miles and does all their charging at home. Anderson stated that most research comparing EVs to ICEs focuses entirely on home charging to present and presume substantially lower maintenance fees to present a best-case scenario.

AEG’s objective was to take into account as many factors as possible without becoming useless. While that’s been accomplished, the conditional nature of the factors going into its calculations severely complicates things. The study even tries to make provisions for the lack of infrastructure that’s currently hamstringing electrification and how batteries behave in colder environments or middle states of charge. Anderson asserts that EV operating costs will come down as batteries improve and charging points become closer, faster, and more prevalent. It’s admirable but the multitude of factors being taken into account still undermines the generalized assessments AEG is attempting to make.

And that should be the takeaway. All of this stuff is so intensely conditional that there’s no easy answer. From our vantage, it seems like the Anderson Economic study does favor ICEs. But it remains useful as a comparative tool to use against the pro-EV studies that are frequently oversimplified. Our advice would be to read both and attempt to make determinations on a case-by-case basis and be mindful of the contributing factors to the AEG report. Commercial charging isn’t the godsend it seemed a few years ago and with less-predictable pricing that’s likely to only go up, it’s looking more like the electricity vs gasoline debate could be a wash.

[Image: Virrage Images/Shutterstock]

Become a TTAC insider. Get the latest news, features, TTAC takes, and everything else that gets to the truth about cars first by subscribing to our newsletter.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

120 Comments on “Study: Do EVs Really Cost Less to Run Than Internal Combustion Cars?...”


  • avatar
    jack4x

    I have a hard time believing that something as ubiquitous as electricity can continue to be sold at such high markups for much longer.

    Gas stations make no money on gas after all, and a charging port has a lot fewer startup and overhead costs than a gas station.

    • 0 avatar
      jpolicke

      Water is fairly ubiquitous too, until you put it in a bottle,
      give it a fancy name and sell it in a convenience store. I have no illusions that electricity sold at retail is going to cost the same as what’s piped into my house.

      • 0 avatar
        jkross22

        Electricity sold at retail….

        What?

        You don’t see your home as a retail customer of the power company?
        How much more or less maintenance of a dedicated power line is required vs power to your home?

  • avatar
    FreedMike

    “But at the same time, they’re an enormous burden in time and in energy in finding chargers and getting them charged…”

    True, perhaps, for anyone without that newfangled invention called a “garage.” With that newfangled invention, I’d say an EV is far easier to keep fueled up than a conventionally powered vehicle. How many car owners have garages? Tens of millions of them.

    The people who adopt EVs won’t be city dwellers – they’ll be suburbanites with a place to charge them. The away-from-home infrastructure will follow them. It’s like suburbanization in reverse.

    That’s why I say EVs won’t replace ICE vehicles for quite some time.

    • 0 avatar
      probert

      It’s already happening.

    • 0 avatar
      mcs

      @FreedMike: Actually, you don’t even need a garage. The charger or a weatherproof NEMA 14-50 RV outlet can be mounted outside.

      • 0 avatar
        Lie2me

        Where? If you live in an apartment in NYC, Chicago or LA, chances are you park on the street. Where are you going to mount an electrical connection on the street?

        • 0 avatar
          Margarets Dad

          Just because it’s not practical for everyone right now doesn’t mean that we don’t move forward with the millions of people for whom it is practical.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            Do you happen to sit on a corporate board? If not, what you want is irrelevant and if the product isn’t profitable or is desired by the customer base it won’t exist. Your line of thinking is the one of the greatest problems in the 21st century.

        • 0 avatar
          WalterRohrl

          There’s a lot of reasons I stopped living in apartments and now own a place with a garage, not having to circle the block multiple times to look for a street parking spot would be far more of a reason than having to occasionally find a charger…Many people in apartments in dense cities don’t even have cars – often by choice. Most people in standalone houses conversely DO have cars simply because there is no other option.

        • 0 avatar
          mcs

          @Lie2me: Where?
          What I meant is that there are homes without garages (or with garages used as storage) where an outdoor outlet or charger could be installed. You don’t have to charge indoors.

          I do think that in some places when municipalities figure out that charging can become a revenue stream, there might be more on-street charging. Revenue from fueling cars getting diverted into municipal coffers via EVs rather than going to oil companies.

          https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1133479_shell-and-ubitricity-target-50-000-on-street-ev-chargers-in-the-uk-by-2025

          • 0 avatar
            mcs

            “rather than going to oil companies.”

            Actually, what I should have said is rather than the entire revenue stream going to the oil company since it’s obvious from the link that the oil companies are in some cases the ones that are installing and presumably maintaining the chargers. Wait until they figure out they can run ads on the screens. That won’t be so good, but whatever.

    • 0 avatar
      Kendahl

      Modern houses come standard with electrical outlets for clothes dryers. No builder would think of omitting it. In time, I think we can expect houses to come standard with outlets for EVs in the garage. To be competitive, apartment complexes will need an EV charging outlet for each parking place. Shopping malls may provide them to attract customers. Being able to recharge your EV at work would be a fringe benefit.

    • 0 avatar

      Why? I can install 55 gallon drum with gasoline in my garage and fuel my car every night.

    • 0 avatar
      Luke42

      I’d go as far as to say that, if your home does not have electrical service, then an EV is not for you.

      For those of us who live on-grid, though, charging an EV is a solvable problem. Admittedly it’s much less of a hassle to solve if you own your home.

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        “if your home does not have electrical service, then an EV is not for you.”

        I’d say one lacking electrical service has bigger problems than EV servicing.

  • avatar
    Fred

    The practical matter of this is that buying a new car to save money never works out. My personal example was to buy an Audi A3 that got 28 mpg of premium, cost me the same to drive as my Chevy truck at 19 mpg of regular. I’ll save money by putting off buying a new car for as long as possible. The rest of this conversation is prejudiced by our own personal political opinions.

    • 0 avatar
      Matt Posky

      Ding ding ding ding!

      People always ask me what kind of car they should buy to save money and help the environment. My answer is always “run what you own until you have to fix it all the time.”

      Nothing lessens the impact on the planet and your wallet like conservation. But it also doesn’t help sell new product.

      • 0 avatar

        Thanks Matt: I have never understood the trade every three mentality. I buy once, cry once, and are the first, second and third owners of each car. I see where the parts are all designed to fail. Most are fixable, tires shocks and brakes are all wear parts, and can be improved in many cases on replacement. Battery and Alternators may be expected to go. Other than one car that inexplicably ate wheel bearings (Genuine GM Parts for the Lose), most cars will be reasonable till 200-250k. Rust got my BMW….Rust is going to get my MDX, the BMW got 334k, the MDX is currently 224k.

        Buy new and run it into the ground….

      • 0 avatar
        Luke42

        @Matt Posky,
        “People always ask me what kind of car they should buy to save money and help the environment. My answer is always “run what you own until you have to fix it all the time.””

        From an environmental perspective, it’s important to consider what happens to your old car after you sell it.

        Most of the time, your old car is sold to someone else and it’s driven until the natural end of its service-life.

        Functional cars rarely end up in the junk yard.

        So, from an environmental perspective, driving what you have *could* bet a net-negative, but only *if* it’s a poor fit for your needs. For instance, if you’re driving a 19MPG pickup truck for a set of tasks that can be performed by a Honda Civic, it’s better to sell that truck to someone who will use it for truck things. That way, those gallons of fuel provide the maximum amount of benefit.

        If, on the other hand, your car is a good match for your needs, that isn’t the case. My wife has a paid-off Honda Civic that’s a really good match for her needs. I want to replace it with a Tesla Model 3 (or Y), but she tells me she’s happy with her Civic. Your advice does apply in this situation. The Civic will remain on the road when sold, and will be used almost exactly the same way by its new owner.

      • 0 avatar
        jkross22

        The single largest expense of automotive ownership is depreciation.

        Buy something different when your current ride doesn’t meet your needs.

        My kids are getting big and the back seat of my car really can’t accommodate them. I’m looking at new things and taking my sweet time.

  • avatar
    Crosley

    At least the math I’ve done, charging in your home in a “normal” state with sane utility policies (not CA), it’s way cheaper to charge a car than fill with fuel. Like $7 to charge the battery to full on a Tesla Model 3 vs $45 to fill a similar sedan with gas at today’s prices. A commercial charger is a huge premium over most homes.

    That being said, you’re paying an enormous premium for an electric vehicle drivetrain, so not sure if the whole exercise is cheaper.

    Just drop the taxpayer subsidies and the crazy CAFE policies hand let consumers make the call. If it’s cheaper, it will win.

    • 0 avatar
      probert

      Drop the subsidies on for oil companies, factor in health costs, and add in the cost of military support – yes – the price will rise.

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        A globally capable military is needed to maintain the status of the Petrodollar, and I say that as a person who wishes the defense budget to be reduced. From the geopolitical standpoint, that is tantamount.

      • 0 avatar
        Crosley

        So intellectually lazy.

        What subsidies? The entire green industry runs on welfare.

        Talk to Biden and Hillary why they voted to go in Iraq, was it all over oil?

      • 0 avatar
        Margarets Dad

        Yes, I love the oft-expressed outrage on TTAC over billions in EV subsidies, conveniently forgetting the tens of trillions of military dollars we’ve spent, and thousands of lives lost, over the past couple of decades ensuring a cheap, reliable supply of Middle Eastern oil.

        • 0 avatar
          WalterRohrl

          You mean the federal EV subsidies that refund a buyer their own tax dollars due (no more than that, and not anyone else’s) and if they don’t have enough of a tax obligation then they don’t get the money, are those the ones you mean? That’s the part of that narrative that usually doesn’t get mentioned (or perhaps understood by the authors of the screeds), at least as far as the federal level of incentives is concerned.

          Those same people complaining are generally the ones that want to lower or eliminate taxes in and of themselves anyway, so the outrage makes even less sense.

          The best part of all of that though is with Tesla buyers currently no longer being eligible to receive them due to the number of cars sold so far, their cars are STILL the go-to preferred choice which isn’t what the narrative has been (i.e. their sales will stall when the incentives go away – nope, didn’t happen, not even close). Maybe people just like the fact that they are designed in the US, built in the US, the major parts and batteries are built in the US and thus employ US workers (all of which pay income taxes and have money to spend on the rest of economy) and work quite well which is harder to ignore as they are ever-more present on the roads (perhaps the independent “reporting” was wrong all along?) – as opposed to the manufacturing aspect of a number of other EVs and their major components, (even from other US-based brands) that are built or sourced abroad.

          That’s the real story. But it’s easier to crap on Tesla specifically because they don’t provide test cars and they don’t advertise so they are the safe whipping boy for any outlet. Rare is the “journalist” who actually has either the opportunity or werewithal to spend a significant amount of time in one. Whatever happened to objectivity?

        • 0 avatar
          28-Cars-Later

          Once again, Petrodollar. Those trillions wasted had no value without it.

        • 0 avatar
          mcs

          @Margarets Dad: Don’t forget the cost of beach cleanups from oil spills/leaks. Even once the beaches are “cleaned”, you still encounter tarballs that you have to clean off your feet or beach towel. I’ve experienced that first hand. It’s not fun.

      • 0 avatar
        Imagefont

        The question is not about subsidies, the question is if you buy an EV right now, the way the world is today. It’s a practical question, not hypothetical. EV’s are not as cheap as they are advertised to be although charging at home is very economical. But only if you’re always within round trip driving distance of your house. Once you go on a long trip an EV becomes a huge burden.
        Drive a Prius, save money and the planet and never worry about range. Problem solved.

    • 0 avatar
      Imagefont

      Nothing has changed, it’s still all about range anxiety. When I drive to a gas station I tolerate the inconvenience because it only last 5-10 minutes. For charging it’s more like 30-60 minutes to top off and get you to your destination. And maybe longer. I can stand there in the cold for five five minutes but for an hour, that’s a big ask. If you can do round trips from home and the range is sufficient, an EV might be for you. Cheap electricity at home, charge at night, save money on “fuel” and never visit a gas station again. But, want to drive just a little further away and suddenly you’re charging away from home. And the further you go the more complicated it gets. Even with lots of chargers you’re still hanging out at the charger, surfing the web or whatever, waiting for the electrons to trickle into your battery. How much is your time worth under those conditions. EV’s work better for some than others. An EV would be useless for me except as a second car.

      • 0 avatar
        mcs

        ” But, want to drive just a little further away ”

        Three to five hours away from home isn’t just “a little further away”. You’re exaggerating.

        • 0 avatar
          Imagefont

          I regularly drive 300 mile round trips, which I don’t think of as excessive. Not every day of course, but often enough that a car with a 295 mile range would be useless if I can’t charge at my destination, and I can’t. I’m not going to buy a second car because my expensive EV can’t do the job. Many people make this calculation. I would wager that 99.9% of all EV owners have a second car that runs on dead dinosaurs.

          • 0 avatar
            WalterRohrl

            Seems like Tesla Model 3 Long Range at 353 miles would be perfect for you if that’s the main concern. Think of the money you’ll save refueling it at home when you return after driving 300 miles. But there’s likely a reason that it won’t work for you, right?

            If nothing else there is likely a Supercharger on the way and a simple ten minute stop to take a piss would add close to 100 miles of range. Have you noticed that used Teslas now cost more than new ones? And that they don’t depreciate anywhere near what a Leaf or different EV with inferior tech does? Or even a regular car?

            Usually people here have the 400 mile daily round trip or weekly cross country trip…They’ll have to wait for the Lucid Air and its 520 mile range, deliveries just started. But as soon as those get somewhat popular, people will have to drive even further.

          • 0 avatar
            mcs

            ” I would wager that 99.9% of all EV owners have a second car that runs on dead dinosaurs.”

            Why? Not everyone makes regular 300 mile round trips. Even if you do, in many cases there is charging. I sometimes make trips of that distance, but I have private non-public charging available. If I didn’t, there are 3 or 4 quick chargers available.

            If you don’t have the ability to charge, you can now buy 400 or 520-mile range EVs. They’re expensive now, but the prices will be coming down as lower cost batteries and higher-density batteries start coming onto the market. LFE batteries are making it into production now. Teslas higher density lower cost 4680s are a year or two away.

            If I was making a 300-mile trip regularly, I’d definitely use an EV. Thirty+ dollars vs. what I could get from solar panels for free. Assuming a Model 3 long range which in real-world testing gets 310 miles range, I could make the round trip, but would probably make a 5 minute stop at a super charger for some “padding”. I can think of places in the southwest where that sort of trip might be difficult, but here in the Northeast, it isn’t a problem. I also realize for the working poor, an EV would be expensive. Eventually, we’ll see a low-cost EV once some of the new battery tech makes it to the market. CATL’s combo pack that mixes lithium-ion cells with their sodium-ion cells seems promising for lowering costs. That pack is about 2 or 2 years from mass production, so there is hope.

          • 0 avatar
            Luke42

            @ImageFront,
            “I regularly drive 300 mile round trips, which I don’t think of as excessive. Not every day of course, but often enough that a car with a 295 mile range would be useless if I can’t charge at my destination, and I can’t.”

            Then maybe an EV isn’t for you at this point.

            An EV is a great fit for me, though.

            EVs don’t have to be all things to all people. If everyone could use an EV drove one, that would save a lot of gasoline for the tasks which really require it.

            Time to put conservation back into Conservatives.

          • 0 avatar
            C5 is Alive

            “Time to put conservation back into Conservatives.”

            Let’s focus first on enforcing sanity and common sense throughout the feral, batsh|t crazy Left.

          • 0 avatar
            Luke42

            @C5 is Alive
            “Let’s focus first on enforcing sanity and common sense throughout the feral, batsh|t crazy Left.”

            I live in a very liberal college town.

            Our feral nerd population does tend to congregate in their native environs: libraries, classrooms, laboratories, and field research stations!

            Some of them even do study bats and their $#!t. And they’re crazy about it — for science! Others study fish, math, or chemistry. Nerds, I tell you!

            I agree, you gotta watch these folks. Don’t ever say “so, tell me about your research” around these feral nerds. You will see their natural and wild behavior patterns.

        • 0 avatar
          jkross22

          This argument again? C’mon mcs, the reality is that people have different use cases. That you don’t understand that is an issue you should explore.

          I like fast cars that handle great. Lots of electrics fall in that category so I think EVs are great. But they’re not for everyone.

  • avatar
    SCE to AUX

    This is an opinion piece with a cherry-picked study that compares apples to oranges.

    At 4 miles/kWh for the cars mentioned (Leaf, Bolt, Model 3), the commercial price works out to *$0.518* per kWh in that absurd example. Who would pay that much, and where?

    My home rate is less than $0.10, and I just paid $0.16 at an Electrify America charger. That’s right, I bought 17 kWh for $2.71, enough to take my Ioniq 68 miles at 4 miles/kWh. That would be $3.99 in this 100-mile example, not over $12.

    The article starts with operating costs – which are demonstrably lower – and morphs into TCO. That’s a different calculus, and hardly worth delving into here.

    However, nobody should buy an EV to save money on gas, unless you’re a commercial delivery operation. The Semi and the Rivian van aren’t being ordered because Walmart and Amazon expect to spend more money.

    • 0 avatar
      CoastieLenn

      Serious question not intended to be inflammatory- did you not read the middle part, right before the “calculated” price breakdown? The costs they figured factored in fuel/ electricity price, time, performance, vehicle price, tax breaks/subsidies, etc.

      I would copy/paste it, but it would be just too damn much.

      Regardless of the validity of the study, there was much more than just “price per kwh” factored into this.

      • 0 avatar
        SCE to AUX

        I did read that. Those are components of the Total Cost of Ownership, not pure operating cost.

        The article started with an example of a 100-mile drive. I can’t think of an EV that would cost more than an ICE to make that drive, unless we compare a 60-mpg hybrid to an i-Pace paying maximum price for electricity somewhere.

        It’s telling that companies (who always want to save money) are considering and buying electric vehicles. But of course, maybe they’ve been duped also.

      • 0 avatar
        mcs

        @CoastieLenn: Read the Car and Driver piece. There are a lot of flaws in their calculations and C&D outlines them.

        Also, just a comment on a “cost of time” factor. I’ve always been able to work when I’ve been commercial charging. Either that or I’ve done grocery shopping or had meals. I’ve never in 7 years lost time while commercial charging.

    • 0 avatar

      It does depend on where you live. With the current increase in gas electric is cheaper again, where I live, but back a year ago the fuel cost for a bolt vs a cruze was pretty close when we had under $2 a gallon gas an almost $0.25/kwh for power.

  • avatar
    Lou_BC

    New tech will always be more expensive. The first computer I purchased was expensive. Decades later my phone can do the same work. Plenty claim that diesels pay for themselves. The math can be decidedly different. One would have to do a “self” assessment to determine if an EV will save them money in operating costs.

  • avatar
    dwford

    I have been considering purchasing a Chevrolet Bolt to replace my Chevrolet Cruze for full time Uber. Currently I spend about $30 per day on gas. But electricity is going to cost me $.21/kwh. So for a 60kw battery that’s $12.60 per day – a substantial savings. There is no point trying to amortize a home charger over the lifespan of a single vehicle, since the charger will last for years and multiple future vehicles. Also, the cost of purchasing an EV is getting much closer the cost of a comparable gas vehicle. Consider the VW ID4 at $40,000 vs multiple compact crossovers that can hit that price.

  • avatar
    jmo2

    Jelopnik has a much better write up. Long story short it’s like that study that said a Suburban was better for the environment than a Prius. The did that by claiming a 300k mile life for the Suburban and 80k for the Prius.

  • avatar
    ajla

    “researchers attempt to account for this by linking the time wasted during charging to potentially lost wages.”

    Lol.

    • 0 avatar
      mcs

      Yeah, I know. It’s not like you’re standing there squeezing a handle pumping in electrons. I work remotely most of the time anyway so I’ve always worked while commercial charging. Except when I’ve used the time for grocery shopping or eating. Yep, like Car and Driver says, they made some questionable assumptions. It was a study where they started with the conclusions they wanted and wrote a paper to match the conclusions.

      • 0 avatar
        CoastieLenn

        @mcs:
        “It was a study where they started with the conclusions they wanted and wrote a paper to match the conclusions.”
        This can literally be applied to almost any studied or analyzed evolutionary crossroads at any point. This isn’t a new concept. COVID, Global Warming/ Climate Change, ICE vs. BEV, Ben and Jerry’s vs. Blue Bell, Ford vs. GM, and so on.

        Your statement is literally the reason that nobody trusts anything anymore, regardless of who researches and documents it. People become so fixated on following the money trail of these studies and eventually realize (hopefully realize) that the number of researchers NOT bought and paid for is greatly surpassed by those that are because #fundingmatters in research.

        We literally live in a society where you need to question if you can trust your family physician to not prescribe you a medication that’s not ideal for your situation just because the pharma company that produces it pays him kickbacks. Sad really. We have no idea who we can trust so we latch onto things that seem to fit our ideologies the best and argue for those to the death.

        • 0 avatar
          Matt Posky

          CoastieLenn

          That’s basically what I tried to impart here and as frequently as possible in most articles. The AEG study takes into a count a lot of stuff that other studies totally ignore. But it also feels like it ends up crossing a few bridges just to make EVs seem less friendly to your pocketbook.

          Everyone is trying to sell you on something and truly independent media is almost nonexistent. I’m just asking that we try to take as much into account before sharing our own opinions and trying to surmise what the facts really are.

  • avatar
    Scoutdude

    This is a garbage study and the article about it is only slightly better.

    The majority of EV drivers do the vast majority of their charging at home not at the rip off that is public charging, yet calculations I saw at the other outlet I read about this first, indicate the majority of charging will be done at public chargers.

    Next they say that a typical EV gets 3-4 miles per kilowatt and then proceed to 3 mi/kwh for their EV calculations. In other words they are basing the amount of electricity used on the least efficient EV and comparing it to the average of average smaller vehicles. There is no attempt to say compare a specific EV vs a specific ICE vehicle of similar size.

    I’ve done “a study” of my own as we have owned a PHEV. When I ran the calcs electricity was at 12.5 cents/kwh and gas was about $3.10/gal. Running on gas alone the car gets ~38mpg. At home assuming a 10% charging loss it cost almost exactly half as much to run on electricity as it does on gas. The EA stations in my area were charging ~3x the home rate, if you have a membership or ~4x w/o a membership for level 2.

    In other words charge at home 1/2 the price of using gas, charge at a public station and it is 2x as expensive as using gas.

    As far as this article goes the claims about it being hard because electricity prices vary so much is a pretty lame comment because gas prices vary significantly too. As of today there are places in TX that are under $2.50 gal and in CA there are places that are over $4.50 gal. Even within a local region it can vary significantly from station to station or within just a few miles.

    Meanwhile when you plug in at home you know what you’ll pay every time. Yes there are locations with time of day pricing, but your rate doesn’t change day by day. Ditto with the fast charging points, if it cost X today it will cost X tomorrow and the day or week after it.

    Changes in electricity rates tend require gov’t approval while the gas station owner can change it up at their whim, bump it up because it is a 3 day weekend or because there is an event in town.

    If only there was a way for the average person to compare the cost of powering different vehicles based on the actual prices in one’s own area.

    Oh wait there is fueleconomy.gov

    I used it customized for prices in my area and it says that a Mach E AWD ER charged at 13 cents/kwh will cost $1.21 to drive 25 miles while an Escape with the 1.5T and AWD will cost $3.12 to cover that same distance using $3.50/gal gas. Meanwhile the Escape PHEV which is only FWD with cover 25 miles for $1.04 on electricity and $2.19 for gas at those same rates.

    • 0 avatar
      Scoutdude

      I should add that they also just pulled a number out of a hat for what it costs to have equipment installed at home. If you buy a Mach E and don’t need the fastest possible charging at home you can just have a 240v outlet installed in your garage and use the included cord.

      How much the actual install cost is going to vary greatly depending on the going hourly and permitting rates based on your location as well as the location of the panel in your home and its capacity.

      A panel in the garage where you can locate the outlet/equipment next to the panel will be much cheaper than if you have to run the wire 20-30′ and disturb a lot of finished drywall.

    • 0 avatar
      WalterRohrl

      Scout, it’s the typical biased Matt Posky Editorial/Opinion piece disguised as “News”. Some extremely basic research would have made all of your points obvious (Perhaps the research was actually done and the post still wrote itself, who knows). The “Study” cited is embarrassing to its authors and the regurgitation of it here just as much for TTAC. Without even a working knowledge of the tech, a writer should not attempt to write about it, or at least, the work product should be checked (i.e. edited) by an “editor” a rung up the ladder.

      A random example from the post: “For example, finding a fast charger in the middle of Iowa while you’re traversing unfamiliar territory can be a nightmare”

      I actually did that this summer on a roadtrip. But I happened to be in a Tesla (no, I’m not a full on Tesla stan, it just happens to do its job better than the current competition). In a Tesla (ANY Tesla, currently the most ubiquitous EV brand on America’s roads so a very valid vehicle to base research on) that giant screen with the navigation map on it all the time shows you EVERY single Tesla Supercharger location. Click on any one and it shows you how many of the 8 or 12 or 48 or whatever chargers at that location are currently in use and how far away it is. It also tells you the cost of the energy as well as if it changes rates and to what depending on time of day. Near a state line? Click the two closest chargers across the line from each other and decide which is cheaper, use that one. The car will route you through the chargers automatically if you want it to. It will not let you run out of charge if you follow its suggestions that are updated in real time as you travel. Frankly it’s brilliant and that’s not a boast. It just is.

      So no nightmare if using the right tech in the right car. But wait, someone bought Brand F or Brand N or Brand C instead, okay, a smartphone can tell you the same as to where chargers are for any other EV, not hard unless you still use a Motorola Razr (although every other charging system is seriously lacking comparatively and costs far more than Tesla’s, I will grant that). Before even entering Iowa though you can be well aware of where the relevant charger for your vehicle is located. Frankly it was far more difficult owning a Diesel vehicle and visiting California or a few other states a decade or so ago, not every gas station carries/carried it, coincidentally, not even in Iowa.

      You’re bang on regarding the “fuel prices” BS, both gasoline and electric. Pretty basic stuff to have to call out.

      Same with charging at home. Most EV drivers (actually most drivers period) are not long haul truckers, most gas up within five miles of home or work 98% or so of their lives. EV owners just can do it in their own garage and be full every morning. The only time to use a public charger is on a trip, same with a gasoline car, you generally use your favorite local gas station unless on a trip. Overall the cost is likely less to “refuel” in your garage on a per mile basis.

      But all that doesn’t generate the clickbait clicks, I know, and here we are feeding the machine. But respecting it less evermore.

      This whole post could have been so much more, and more interesting without the agenda at play. Posky’s not a bad writer, per se. But I get it, Posky has family in the auto industry (by his own admission) that are probably afraid of being made redundant (my guess, hence the false narratives). Fine. But every year more people become EV drivers, many are still gearheads, many still read auto websites, and many will figure out sooner or later as to where there is actual news and info and where there is politicized red meat click-baitery with a false narrative. Wait until the EV-curious rent one of the 100k Hertz Teslas and realize how easy it is to find and use a Supercharger. They won’t be going back to the farm (of gasoline) long term. Everybody eventually needs to replace their car, sooner or later the tipping point happens and it makes sense to buy an EV instead of a gasser (not for everyone, but probably a majority) in which case the other major false narrative gets blown up, that people will lose money replacing their perfectly good existing car – they obviously don’t need to, the cars will wear out sooner or later anyway, so use it up and THEN consider switching.

      • 0 avatar
        EBFlex

        Hilarious

        “I don’t like the facts so I’m going to attack the person reporting them”.

        Theres no agenda. EVs are a joke. EV range is a joke. EV refueling times are excessively long. EVs are inconvenient. EVs are inefficient. EVs are expensive. We don’t have an infrastructure network that can handle EVs. EVs are incredibly damaging to the planet and not green at all.

        There is ZERo advantage to EVs. A $150K EV is out classed by a $15K mitsubishi Mirage or Nissan Versa.

  • avatar
    indi500fan

    I think the big unanswered question is battery life and resulting useful value in old age.
    The Nissan Leaf is an example of catastrophic depreciation and certainly the Teslas will be a lot better but right now still to be proven.

    Currently, ten yr old/120,000 mile gas cars in decent cosmetic shape command pretty good money. Will be interesting to see how that compares with the Tesla 3s in 2027.

    • 0 avatar
      Astigmatism

      Within 25 miles of me on Autotrader there are three 2013-2014 Tesla Model S’s (esses?), priced between $33,990 and $38,590. There are three 2013-2014 BMW 7 series, priced between $23,990 and $29,598.

    • 0 avatar
      WalterRohrl

      “Currently, ten yr old/120,000 mile gas cars in decent cosmetic shape command pretty good money. Will be interesting to see how that compares with the Tesla 3s in 2027.”

      Why wait?

      The Model S was released nine years ago in 2012. Compare its resale values to it competitors – realistically BMW, Mercedes, Audi middle to upper series?

      Compare four year old Model 3s to BMW 3, Audi A4, C-class. Or even an Accord or Camry or Fusion if you must. The Tesla does quite well.

  • avatar
    CoastieLenn

    Ok, a bit… outlandish, but hear me out.

    What if this whole global push toward electrification isn’t driven so much by saving the planet, its driven by world leaders certainty that there’s a huge looming war afoot and they’re doing their damndest to stockpile fuel as quickly as they can without scaring people?

    Eh? Eh? Eh?

    • 0 avatar
      dwford

      Well, we all know that the real purpose of autonomous cars is to control us. Once we are locked into the car they can send it to whatever reeducation camp they want. Go down the rabbit hole…

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      @CoastieLenn – that’s something people do not grasp. The USA military consumes 12,600,000 US gallons (48,000,000 L) of fuel per day. That’s even before it engages in war.

      • 0 avatar
        CoastieLenn

        Well sort of, we are ALLOCATED that amount, not necessarily consuming that amount! That’s about 300,000bbls per day. The US currently imports about 7.86 million barrels of oil (42 gallons per barrel). The current reserve is what, over 60 billion gallons of crude in reserve? We just auctioned off 20 million gallons in August.

    • 0 avatar
      SCE to AUX

      Baseless conspiracy theories are fun.

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      While it did occur to myself and others that the events of 2020 -which will almost certainly continue into 2024/25- may have a relation to Peak Oil, a “huge war” in the Post Information age would almost have to be agreed to by the major nuclear powers. Since such a “huge” war would likely be *between* those powers I don’t see a world war in the offing. Whatever happens will likely be more sinister.

    • 0 avatar
      EBFlex

      “ Ok, a bit… outlandish, but hear me out.

      What if this whole global push toward electrification isn’t driven so much by saving the planet, its driven by world leaders certainty that there’s a huge looming war afoot and they’re doing their damndest to stockpile fuel as quickly as they can without scaring people?”

      It’s been abundantly clear that the global push to EVs has nothing to do with the environment. Same for “green” legislation. Anyone that thinks otherwise is astoundingly ignorant or just party of the 81 million that believes anything they hear on CNN

  • avatar
    Boxerman

    Here’s my simple calculas.
    I can lease a new Mercedes GlC 300 for 30k for 36 months, or a tesla Model Y for the same price. To me they’re equivalent vehicles, the mercdes may be a bit more luxury and the tesla more iphone cool minimalist but makes up for it in raw performance.

    The tesla I can charge at home every night and go a “real” 250 miles each day, there is zero need to comercialy charge. A full charge is $12 to go 250 miles.

    The glc gets a real 24 mpg, I know this because were on our second one already. Thats 10 gallons roughly at $4 per gallon, I’ve seen higher and lower gas prices around and about.
    Lets call it $40 to go 250 miles.

    Now lest multiply by 1 year 12k miles, thats $1920 in gas, and $576 in electricity. Lets add in that besides tires and wiper blades the tesla needs nothing, whereas the mercdes has some other mainatance expenses, oil changes at 10k, brake pads around 24k and time lost getting the car to servicing. With regen an tesla will not need pads in 50k miles.

    Ill add to the tesla cost the upgraded fatser charger $500 and some elctrical work say $1000-1500. Its pretty clear that while year 1 may be breakeven, by the end of year 3 you’ll end up at least 3k ahead.

    Bear in mind both cars are a lease for same cost, so end of 36k values battery life etc are irrleevant. Yes on the ice car you have ease of long range abilities, and on the bev you’re pretty much never going to a gas station for weekly use which is great.
    Which is ab etter daily experince silent runing and an infinte well of power vs the badge and a bit more luxury.
    If you buy the cars, then Im assuming the tesla will go 200k miles with minimal mechanical costs whereas no mercedes will got hat distance without some serious $ spent.

    If you have a suburban home/garage and your daily trips are less than 250 miles its hard to beat a bev, and in time those numbers will just get better.
    Would liek to hear where Im wrong cause I’ve got both on order and cant decide which one to take.

    As we have an ice car and truck for road trips past 250 miles the value proposition is in favor of the tesla.

  • avatar
    Margarets Dad

    “However, the rhetoric surrounding electrification has gotten so aggressive that it’s fast becoming another contentious issue, leading to vicious arguments as people square up to take sides.”

    It’s only contentious to you and about a dozen commenters on TTAC, Matt. Everyone I talk to in the real world (generally the 80+% of the American public who just sees cars as a way from point A to point B) is looking forward to their next car being an EV.

    • 0 avatar
      dwford

      “Everyone” would be your small circle of friends family and coworkers. Of the 10s of millions of car buyers every year, those seeking an EV is still a tiny percentage. Yes, it’s coming, but for most people over the next 5-10 years, their next car is still going to use gas

      • 0 avatar
        Margarets Dad

        Well, sure. A change this big isn’t going to happen overnight, any more than we converted from horses to automobiles overnight. 5-10 years goes by fast.

        • 0 avatar
          NigelShiftright

          ” A change this big isn’t going to happen overnight, any more than we converted from horses to automobiles overnight.”

          That’s quite true, but as I understand it, there were no governments issuing diktats to the effect that no more horses were to be bred after 1915.

          • 0 avatar
            Margarets Dad

            You must have missed the part where the government spent a shit-ton of money on fancy new roads starting in the 1910s.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            There were horse restrictions due to sh!t on streets

          • 0 avatar
            Luke42

            “That’s quite true, but as I understand it, there were no governments issuing diktats to the effect that no more horses were to be bred after 1915.”

            Not so sure about that:
            https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofBritain/Great-Horse-Manure-Crisis-of-1894/

            Folks in NYC had similar concerns.

            History doesn’t repeat itself, but it does rhyme.

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      No, they really don’t for a variety of reasons. But I have to agree with the overall point, because EV is part of the overall agenda.

  • avatar
    DenverMike

    How often will my EV pickup require a new battery pack? Basically how often will it be totaled technically? I know I can get 50+ years out of an ICE pickup and even the price of major repairs can be minimal, depending on resourcefulness.

    • 0 avatar
      CoastieLenn

      You have a point there. A normal IC engine doesn’t have a “shelf life” or “life expectancy”. They’ll literally go millions of miles if they’re cared for well enough. A battery has a shelf life, it has a finite number of charge cycles before it’s degraded to a point that its no longer functional.

      People can say all they want that the cost of these technologies will come down, and they certainly will come down, but (in the case of a Tesla) how often over the course of a 20 year ownership experience will I need to have the floor of my Model S removed and replaced? No matter what, that will not be cheap and it WILL need to happen.

      Seems to me that when those costs are looked at over time, an ICE vehicle can cost $XYZ over 20 years and be considered “death by 1000 cuts” with fuel ups and occasional repairs, but a BEV will cost $XYZ and be all well and good until a shotgun blast to the face. I’ll take 1000 cuts.

    • 0 avatar
      dal20402

      A properly designed battery should be able to get you at least 2,000 full cycles or 600,000 miles for a 300-mile EV. You’re going to be replacing one or more engines or transmissions in your ICE pickup over that kind of lifespan.

    • 0 avatar
      WalterRohrl

      You can certainly get 50 years out of a pickup (with repairs and some major component replacements) but look around your commute tomorrow and let us know how many 1971 model year pickups you see. Then compare them to how many pickups you see that are less than ten years old. Actually I’ll even spot you the pickup part. How many VEHICLES (cars, trucks, vans, whatever) do you see that are from 1971 or before?

      It’s not reality. People don’t drive their cars for fifty years. I’d presume you aren’t still driving whatever your first vehicle was and you’ve likely been driving for a maximum of 50 years…

      • 0 avatar
        DenverMike

        You kidding? I’d love a ’71. Anything ’71. Pinto on up! Most things from 50+ years ago were crushed long ago for a multitude reasons, and there was no reason to save most.
        Who the hell knows what will happen in the next 50+, except my ’05 F-150 is far from obsolete, and I can keep it going indefinitely for very little cash.

        • 0 avatar
          WalterRohrl

          The point was that while you CAN, the vast majority DON’T for various reasons. There’ll be some EVs from today around in fifty years as well. Likely a greater percentage of the total, as battery tech gets cheaper and everything else does as well it’s far easier to retrofit things into a shell. Just like any number of “classic” cars are being reimagined as EVs currently with BEV powertrains being slotted in.

          I’m quite familiar with your generation F150 and while it’s comfortable and gets the job done, one ride in its 2021 equivalent and all of a sudden the ’05 seems oooollllldddddd. Especially if you need to drive up way I-70 and even more so if the weather turns icy. But for getting mulch or hauling lumber locally? Sure, it’ll be great forever, nothing wrong with it at all. But they don’t seem to go much more than 250k without major work so after fifty years that’s likely two trannys and perhaps the better part of two engine overhauls conservatively speaking. A battery will cost far less by then.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            Thanks! It’s highly suspect you would know the cost of replacing the battery or the battery itself. Or the “value” of the used EV truck and at which point it’s totaled with a bad battery.

            I know nothing can total my ’05 King Ranch, short of a major crash or burnt to the ground. Same with a new ’21 ICE.

            That KR rides no different than a new ’21, yes it may have it beat on some gadgetry and a drag race obviously.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            A battery replacement in a typical EV is currently about a $10k job and that will come down in the future as batteries continue to get cheaper. In the end, it won’t be much different from engine or transmission replacement on an ICE vehicle: major surgery that will be worth it for some vehicles, but not for others.

            But a well-engineered battery should last longer than your average ICE or automatic transmission does today.

          • 0 avatar
            Arthur Dailey

            @DenverMike: Not sure what it is like in Colorado but up here in Canada road salt has defeated thousands of F150s and their counterparts from other manufacturers. And it takes far less than 50 years to do it.

          • 0 avatar
            mcs

            “But a well-engineered battery should last longer than your average ICE or automatic transmission does today.”

            The CATL lithium-iron LFP batteries that are going to be put into lower-end Teslas should have 5,000 full cycle charge lifetime. For a 250 mile range car, 5,000 cycles is 1,250,000 miles. At 1,250,000 miles, it will still have 80% capacity.

  • avatar
    EBFlex

    EVs are a liberal pipe dream but reality (like most liberal things) is vastly different. They are more expensive, more damaging to the planet, far more of an inconvenience, have much shorter ranges and very long refueling times.

    If they had any merits of their own, people wouldn’t need to be bribed to buy them from the government. EVs are a major boondoggle and there isn’t anything on the horizon that looks to change that. All of the current and future EVs are laughably bad. And automakers that care more about virtue signaling than they do running a business will dive deep into these PowerWheels just to appear woke. But everyone knows EVs are decades behind ICE vehicles.

    • 0 avatar
      WalterRohrl

      The government stopped “Bribing” Tesla buyers with their own tax money two years ago and guess what? Sales went up. Sounds like by your logic there are plenty of merits.

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        @WalterRohrl – don’t waste your time replying. Any sort of interaction just feeds the troll.

      • 0 avatar
        EBFlex

        “The government stopped “Bribing” Tesla buyers with their own tax money two years ago and guess what? Sales went up. Sounds like by your logic there are plenty of merits.”

        By that logic, the government should stop all incentives then….as sales will rise.

        Your arguments are as pathetic as Lou_MR and Freed Mikey

  • avatar

    My solution to the problem would be buy bicycle.

    • 0 avatar
      dal20402

      You can even get your bicycle with a battery and a motor! (An ebike is the best city transportation device yet invented, at least where there’s secure bike parking.)

      • 0 avatar
        mcs

        “An ebike is the best city transportation device yet invented, at least where there’s secure bike parking.)”

        Well, for you and I maybe. For people with a deathwish, there are those 60+ MPH standup scooters. A nice Dualtron X2. A kid’s toy that can keep up with freeway traffic.

        https://www.electricscooterinsider.com/60-70-mph-electric-scooters/

    • 0 avatar
      ToolGuy

      @ILO, one of my bicycles is 30 years old, the other one is 19 years old. The ‘newer’ one is recently showing signs of wear. My banker (spouse) says I can consider buying one new bicycle next year – if I stop buying so many car parts first.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    @DenverMike–You are correct if you live in an area without salt and chemicals on the road you can make a vehicle last for decades with proper maintenance. Most people do not keep a vehicle more than 5 years even though they could keep them for much longer with little cost and over the long run save a lot. The longest I kept a vehicle was almost 21 years which was my 99 S-10 which I gave to my nephew and which is still running strong with a like new body and paint and with 100ks of mileage left in it with regular maintenance. I will most likely never keep a vehicle that long again but if I wanted to I could. With EVs besides the battery life and cost to replace the batteries will become technically obsolete as more buyers want more features and longer range. Car makers don’t want you to keep your vehicles and have learned from Apple that you can get people to buy the latest and greatest. Apple even slows down the operation of older I Phones and will not technically support them after a number of years. This is great for the automakers since they want you to buy a new vehicle more often. Those of us who are thrifty or as you have called us “cheapskates” we want to keep our vehicles longer and we get high on the feeling of not having a monthly payment. Leasing a vehicle gives buyers a new vehicle more often and gives the manufacturers fatter profits but then you never pay off a vehicle.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      I’d like to keep my F150 since it’s mechanically sound but I’m starting to see rust on the cab corners and rock chip areas even tough it was undercoated. It is low mileage (relatively speaking) but winters are harsh on a vehicle. My 1990 F250 was going to need an engine at 15 years. I would have done it if the body was in better shape and I did not need seating for 4.

  • avatar
    SnarkIsMyDefault

    “there’s no EV on the market that could possibly facilitate my lifestyle, which includes extremely long-distance drives several times per month.”

    This, right here, is the very rational complaint against universal “EV’s”. Battery vehicles are limited use compared to IC ones, as attractive as they can be in other ways. The fanboys pretend this problem doesn’t exist and that EV’s are already a working replacement for all cars and trucks.

  • avatar

    EV’s are making sense for a group of people who have private parking and a 220v line…and a second ICE vehicle. That is a lot of people but not everyone. I’m trying to build a garage, and a 220v outlet is part of the plan, despite my current lack of any EV…just future proofing it. Right now EV isn’t mass market, it’s either a too small Leaf/Bolt, or a too expensive Tesla/Porsche…you have to force it or realllly want it. Delivery trucks, public buses, etc should really be the first things electrified, they have a known route and a place to park and charge every night. I recently drove across Arizona, and there were places you didn’t see a cell phone signal for long periods of time. OK, this isn’t my typical NYC area driving, but for those folks, nope….I like EV as a concept but it’s not there yet as a choice, factoring out status or image.

    I’ve said it before….You’ll know EV have gone truly mass market when the electric outlets outside public buildings all grow locks on the covers.

    • 0 avatar
      bullnuke

      In my mind this is the correct view of EV’s in the current day. Let commercial users adopt and use the technology first to prove the idea in widespread use and in all areas of the country. Dayton, Ohio, has used electric trolley buses fairly successfully for several decades (at least the 70 years of my lifetime) which leads me to believe that electrified mass transport works well. Put some batteries in their other diesel buses that run out through the suburbs and see how that works out. Likewise, the Amazon Prime vans that are seen everywhere should be EV’s – they can afford to be the Beta Testers – if Bezos can afford quick jaunts to space, he can certainly afford to spearhead such an initiative. This will prove things much better and be somewhat more helpful than the various unverifiable testimonials from current EV users – I can accept what they say but it’s a “trust but verify” thing for me.

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      “Delivery trucks, public buses, etc should really be the first things electrified, they have a known route and a place to park and charge every night.”

      Yet this still hasn’t happened, eleven years in.

      • 0 avatar
        bullnuke

        I couldn’t be, perhaps, economics?

      • 0 avatar
        dal20402

        Range is actually still a challenge for public bus applications, especially in cooler climates. They work fine for commuter buses that do a couple of trips at each rush hour (and you’re going to see A LOT of them in that role within this replacement cycle), but they can’t yet replace a bus that stays out from early morning to late night. Another generation of batteries will probably take care of that.

  • avatar
    jalop1991

    dal20502 wrote:
    “A battery replacement in a typical EV is currently about a $10k job and that will come down in the future as batteries continue to get cheaper. In the end, it won’t be much different from engine or transmission replacement on an ICE vehicle: major surgery that will be worth it for some vehicles, but not for others.”

    I have a 2007 Prius, bought new in March 2007. Last month, at 200K miles and 14.5 years of age, a battery cell gave out and I got the warning on the dash.

    The next day at 11am Green Bean Battery showed up at my house. At 11:45am he was FINISHED replacing the battery. On site. In my garage.
    Lifetime warranty. $1600.

    I remember when the entire world crowed about how “that battery will be the death of the Prius”. Nope.

    And it’s A LOT easier than a transmission replacement. 45 minutes. Try replacing a transmission in 45 minutes.

    • 0 avatar
      dal20402

      Yeah, I was talking about a full EV with a big battery. On a Prius or other small-battery hybrid it’s a nonevent, compared with the death of an ICE or transmission that is reasonably likely at the same age or mileage.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    Does Green Bean Battery replace batteries only on Toyota hybrids? How about GM E-Assist and Ford Hybrids?

  • avatar
    pesteele

    While not a consumer-level commodity, some of the argument is reminiscent of the transition from prop airliners to turbines in the 50s.

    In 1955 you could barely find a jet for your fleet, ten years later you couldn’t find a piston engine if you tried.

    Transition from ICE to EV will take a bit longer but not much once it hits the tipping point.

  • avatar
    Lou_BC

    “you’ve fallen for the big lie’

    Which “big lie”?

    So many to chose from!

    That’s an epidemic worse than Covid. Well, unless one thinks Covid is a “big lie”. LOL

    All kidding aside. That is the biggest problem facing any democracy, no one can agree on what actually is the truth.

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      Something for everyone down here at Liar Depot!

      I agree, but its really accelerated over the past ten years. The nearly total absence of real investigative journalism isn’t helping, US media went from Watergate and taking down a corrupt Nixon to “What’s your favorite ice cream flavor Hillary/Dementia Joe”. Zero objective journalism, from the WH Press Corp and zero outrage over the obvious blackouts and control of the access to the “president” (and occasionally borderline nonsensical responses from WH intern Mrs. Psaki-Mecher). Its obvious to Stevie Wonder they are in on all the softball and likely rehearsed questions, they really can’t be believed even when telling the truth – whose fault is that exactly?

  • avatar

    As it is, the actual study assumes a mid-level EV averages 4.2 miles per kWh.
    I don’t know of any EV that averages that in real world driving. Even if one did, that would be based on 90+% of driving in absolute optimal weather conditions.
    It’s hardly as simple as dividing the EPA range estimate by the battery capacity.

    Accounting for charging losses and inclement weather range loss, I expect the average to be more like 3.5 miles per kWh, if not less. That would significantly affect the annual fuel cost.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • mcs: “Most will agree that a major hurdle to the mass adoption of all-electric vehicles is the hassle and speed...
  • azfelix: In the 20th century they prophecized flying cars as the future of personal transportation. Dynamic induction...
  • ToolGuy: “This is a cutting-edge solution to provide a **concrete** answer to the issues of range and charging, both...
  • ToolGuy: How can the sun be heavy? It is lighter than air. (Helium? Hydrogen? Hello!)
  • slavuta: What I imagine is involuntary sterilization with EMF. The Greta’s heaven – Earth is saved....

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber