Article: Charging The Electric Rivian R1S Was More Expensive Than Filling Up Some Notorious Gas Guzzlers

[Stationmaster]

I may have missed it, but did Mr. Tracy mention:
a. If he was driving in all-purpose or conserve mode?

It seems that in conserve mode mode he would have not needed as many charging stops. …. thus the trip would not have been so expensive.

b. Was he “aggressively” driving …. in addition to high speed? By “aggressive” I mean rapid and frequent acceleration and high speed passing.

c. What regen setting was he using?

d. What was the weather …. any head winds?

Lastly, I liked his oxymoron at the end of his article …. “ He drives …an efficient EV”.

Sponsored

 

[Mathme]

I just drove round trip from the Bay Area to Seattle and back. The cost for charging on that trip for my Quad R1T with AT 20s was $316 for 1800 miles of driving. Driving a similar sized ICE SUV that gets 20mpg with $4 gas (which is what I paid yesterday for my ICE rental) will cost $360.

 

[iansriv]

I may be daft but I am not aware of a similar ICE SUV that gets 20mpg. I consider the Range Rover a similar proportion SUV to the R1S. Are people actually getting 20mpg on the highway with a RR? I must have been doing something wrong because I was getting closer to 8mpg.

 

[technerd]

While I originally got into EVs to save money, I don't keep my Rivian because it's cheaper than a gas truck, I prefer how fast and quiet EVs and it works for my lifestyle. I don't think EVs are currently for the masses, they have plenty of drawbacks, biggest being the erratic charging pricing, performance and reliability are a huge issue for a lot of people.

 

[Doug]

While I originally got into EVs to save money, I don't keep my Rivian because it's cheaper than a gas truck, I prefer how fast and quiet EVs and it works for my lifestyle. I don't think EVs are currently for the masses, they have plenty of drawbacks, biggest being the erratic charging pricing, performance and reliability are a huge issue for a lot of people.

I agree completely. We love our R1T. I have many friends who ask about the EV and most are clueless and would struggle with it at first. I think it will be awhile and more positive articles and education on how they work before the masses will be onboard. Also many more chargers. I do think if you charge mostly at home they are quite a bit cheaper to use.

 

[bigsky]

Most vehicle gasoline combustion engines sit around 35% efficiency so a realistic number is 11.8kwh per gallon. The EPA conversion is mathematically correct but misleading at best.

Measurements are measurements are measurements.
1 gal. of gasoline = 33.4 kWh. It matters not whatever happens or whatever a vehicle does with it, how little, or how much it uses, what time of the day, winter, summer, spring, wherever measured, too. 1 gal. of gasoline = 33.4 kWh always, full stop.
Much like:
1 hp = 0.746 kW=9,000 BTU/h=745.7 Joules
1 in. = 2.54 cm
1 yard = 3 ft.
1 kg = 2.2 lb.
1 mile = 5,280 ft., etc.

There is no debating this. It's settled law.

The cost of fast charging is outrageous at best. This is one of the biggest downsides to owning an EV, especially if home charging is not available and fast charging is your primary source. The outlandish energy prices for electricity compared to price of energy from gasoline bear that out. No room for debate.

 

[Thedude]

Measurements are measurements are measurements.
1 gal. of gasoline = 33.4 kWh. It matters not whatever happens or whatever a vehicle does with it, how little, or how much it uses, what time of the day, winter, summer, spring, wherever measured, too. 1 gal. of gasoline = 33.4 kWh always, full stop.
Much like:
1 hp = 0.746 kW=9,000 BTU/h=745.7 Joules
1 in. = 2.54 cm
1 yard = 3 ft.
1 kg = 2.2 lb.
1 mile = 5,280 ft., etc.

There is no debating this. It's settled law.

The cost of fast charging is outrageous at best. This is one of the biggest downsides to owning an EV, especially if home charging is not available and fast charging is your primary source. The outlandish energy prices for electricity compared to price of energy from gasoline bear that out. No room for debate.

That’s a long winded way to say that you agree with me. You’ll notice I never said the potential energy contained in gasoline is 33.7kwh, just that it’s an entirely misleading way to compare a gas combustion engine since the real world efficiency means a gallon of gas provides 11.8kwh of usable energy.

 

[DCFC]

I pay.11/kw at home and .37 at a charger. Let’s say there are some other fees that RIVN pays so their profit margin is .20. The cost to install a charger is 25k. So a charger needs to put out 125,000kw to breakeven. Average charge is 75kw. So roughly 1700 stops to breakeven. Until Rivian can get 5 cars per day per charger there is not much margin in charging.
I would think Rivian is seeing one car per day per charger therefore with no maintenance or additional costs it will take 4-5 years to breakeven on SC.

The costs are way higher. I'd ballpark the total install cost including hardware at about half a million a site. Then you need to pay for the maintenance team. And the data monitoring of the network and everything data related (servers, communication) isn't free either.

 

[Zoidz]

I pay.11/kw at home and .37 at a charger. Let’s say there are some other fees that RIVN pays so their profit margin is .20. The cost to install a charger is 25k. So a charger needs to put out 125,000kw to breakeven. Average charge is 75kw. So roughly 1700 stops to breakeven. Until Rivian can get 5 cars per day per charger there is not much margin in charging.
I would think Rivian is seeing one car per day per charger therefore with no maintenance or additional costs it will take 4-5 years to breakeven on SC.

Its likely even higher - I’m thinking (don’t know) that Rivian is probably paying for a land lease and/or royalties to the property owner at the site….?

 

[SANZC02]

This is a bit of a straw man argument and ignores the key point that there is existing energy distribution that has all of those things (location, infrastructure, etc) and sells energy at or below cost while still generating enormous profits across the industry.

When comparing against gas stations it's not ridiculous to be frustrated by the comparatively high cost. As I've said, it's a scarcity issue. If EV chargers were as plentiful as gas stations they would not be able to charge $.40/kwh or more, so the solution is more (and better), EV charging options.

Actually not a straw man argument at all. People are commenting that they are being gouged at the current prices. Putting together a business plan will provide proof one way or the other if it is a valid point.

They are comparing home prices with public charging prices as the only cost. There are other costs associated with running a charging station, land lease, insurance, maintenance, hardware purchase, just for a few. There are also utilities that charge more for commercial electricity than residential and often have high demand charges to pay.

I’m not saying the prices could not be lower because I have not created a business plan myself but just comparing the cost to residential prices in SoCal I do not think they are crazy high or bringing in any excessive profits if any at all.

 

[Joules Burn]

I recall when I purchased my Kia EV6 GT-L, the contract writer was lamenting that the dealer model was in for some changes. He said that dealer profit margin, due to internet pricing, had shifted from purchase to service. EV's were going to require much less service since the "mechanical" aspect had been reduced.

Home charging has dramatically reduced my "energy per mile" and my "service" after 70K+ miles with several EV's has been minimal. No oil changes, smog checks, a myriad of sensor issues - and nobody is going to steal my catalytic converter.

There is more to cost than gas vs electrons. If a small portion of my extended travel miles exceeds the price of gas - BFD.

 

[bigsky]

That’s a long winded way to say that you agree with me. You’ll notice I never said the potential energy contained in gasoline is 33.7kwh, just that it’s an entirely misleading way to compare a gas combustion engine since the real world efficiency means a gallon of gas provides 11.8kwh of usable energy.

You are lost in the world of efficiencies. Your flawed argument might as well also indicate that a pound of feathers is lighter than a pound of lead. Measurements, established definitions of units are absolute. There is no room for discussion or disagreement or interpretations. A gallon of gasoline shall always have 33.4 kWh. Whether or not you agree with it or interpret it every which way you want is as irrelevant as it is pointless and moot. You are making the same argument that an inch is not equal to 2.54 cm but to whatever you think it is. Sorry, it don't work that way.

A gallon of gasoline has 33.4 kWh worth of energy, period. End, finito. Not what you think it has. Not what the "real world" says it has.

 

[Dave Cundiff]

Not sure I understand the debate here.

A gallon of gas may very well have energy potential equivalent to 33.4 kWh.

But I don't know how to make a gallon of gas do what 33.4 kWh of electricity will do....

Best wishes!

 

[Donald Stanfield]

You are lost in the world of efficiencies. Your flawed argument might as well also indicate that a pound of feathers is lighter than a pound of lead. Measurements, established definitions of units are absolute. There is no room for discussion or disagreement or interpretations. A gallon of gasoline shall always have 33.4 kWh. Whether or not you agree with it or interpret it every which way you want is as irrelevant as it is pointless and moot. You are making the same argument that an inch is not equal to 2.54 cm but to whatever you think it is. Sorry, it don't work that way.

A gallon of gasoline has 33.4 kWh worth of energy, period. End, finito. Not what you think it has. Not what the "real world" says it has.

What good is that energy if you can only extract a third of it?

 

[Thedude]

You are lost in the world of efficiencies. Your flawed argument might as well also indicate that a pound of feathers is lighter than a pound of lead. Measurements, established definitions of units are absolute. There is no room for discussion or disagreement or interpretations. A gallon of gasoline shall always have 33.4 kWh. Whether or not you agree with it or interpret it every which way you want is as irrelevant as it is pointless and moot. You are making the same argument that an inch is not equal to 2.54 cm but to whatever you think it is. Sorry, it don't work that way.

A gallon of gasoline has 33.4 kWh worth of energy, period. End, finito. Not what you think it has. Not what the "real world" says it has.

You can’t see the forest for the trees. No one has ever questioned how much potential energy a gallon of gasoline contains. You are absolutely correct that it is a fixed value but that does not change the fact that it really only provides about a 1/3 of that energy in the context of this discussion.

Sponsored