Rivian now charging $.68 per kwh

[bigsky]

It's more like $6-7 per gallon

Check your calculator, please.
KWh per kWh, energywise:
energy content of 1 gallon of gas = 33.7 kWh
Therefore, $0.68/kwh x 33.7 kWh = $22.916
Therefore, in my neck of the woods, EV drivers would pay a lot more, 503% more for energy than ICE drivers pay for their energy.

It matters not that an ICE driver might get 20 mpg and your EV gets 1,000 mpg equivalent. Energy is energy is energy.

Sponsored

 

[captainjp]

I thought only the newer stations are open to non Rivian

Is this the case? Maybe I misunderstood the announcement. Why some and not all? Hardware limitations?

 

[SANZC02]

Check your calculator, please.
KWh per kWh, energywise:
energy content of 1 gallon of gas = 33.7 kWh
Therefore, $0.68/kwh x 33.7 kWh = $22.916
Therefore, in my neck of the woods, EV drivers would pay a lot more, 503% more for energy than ICE drivers pay for their energy.

It matters not that an ICE driver might get 20 mpg and your EV gets 1,000 mpg equivalent. Energy is energy is energy.

Just curious, by that logic shouldn’t a pound of sand cost the same as a pound of gold. ?

 

[Zorg]

Is this the case? Maybe I misunderstood the announcement. Why some and not all? Hardware limitations?

My understanding was that only the newer stations with the taller dispensers were open to all. Maybe something changed over the weekend though.

 

[SANZC02]

My understanding was that only the newer stations with the taller dispensers were open to all. Maybe something changed over the weekend though.

I think you are correct, quick look at the Quartzite, AZ still shows only Rivian pricing.

At the open house in Joshua Tree they said the plan is to open all of them but there was no timeline and they seemed to think only the newer cabinets would be opened but could not confirm older ones never would. Issue is no pay point on older stations but they did acknowledge they could open them with the Rivian app like Tesla did.

 

[Zorg]

I think you are correct, quick look at the Quartzite, AZ still shows only Rivian pricing.

At the open house in Joshua Tree they said the plan is to open all of them but there was no timeline and they seemed to think only the newer cabinets would be opened but could not confirm older ones never would. Issue is no pay point on older stations but they did acknowledge they could open them with the Rivian app like Tesla did.

Looked up Rivian RAN map and it still says that most places are Rivian only. I am sure they will open most of them though. Only way to make money on DCFC

 

[bigsky]

Just curious, by that logic shouldn’t a pound of sand cost the same as a pound of gold. ?

Not in the world I have grown up in. Logic is quite sound. Energy is energy is energy is energy is energy. Please let that sync in. Same thing.
Electricity energy is measured in kWh; gasoline is measured in gallons. We are talking about the ENERGY content of each.
Whether you measure energy content of both electricity and gasoline in kWh, joules, electronvolts, calories, BTU, MWh, etc., the end result is the same: EV owners pay scam prices for ENERGY (electricity) at DCFCs compared to what ICE drives pay for ENERGY (gasoline) at the pump.
It's not rocket science nor does one need a PhD in Economics to figure that out.

 

[carsly]

Of course, some/many/most EV drivers get some/most/all of their energy via AC home charging and some/most/many can also take advantage of off-peak rates for EV charging and/or have access to solar or other sources of energy generation. I don't recall off-peak gasoline rates or being able to extract, refine and pump my own gasoline at home - but YMMV.

Case in point, I have a Land Rover Defender. My first oil change was $300 or so at the one year mark (not required, but who is foolish enough to wait two years before the first oil change?). Second year service which was another oil change and brake fluid plus other minor things was $800+ after refusing a $200 wiper change. So that's $1,100+ on top of fuel expenses. And I haven't even hit intervals to service the diffs, transmission fluid, spark plugs, thermostat, etc. so that $1,100 for the first two years is as low as it gets for any two year interval of ownership.

So the cost to drive 10,000 miles in a year, every year, is likely lower in a Rivian R1S or R1T vs a comparable vehicle. It may be a tighter gap if you only lease each for 2-3 years as you'll trade out before hitting a lot of the ICE maintenance but my math suggests it's 80-90% less expensive, all post-purchase real-world expenses considered, to drive the EV option vs. an ICE option.

 

[Zorg]

Not in the world I have grown up in. Logic is quite sound. Energy is energy is energy is energy is energy. Please let that sync in. Same thing.
Electricity energy is measured in kWh; gasoline is measured in gallons. We are talking about the ENERGY content of each.
Whether you measure energy content of both electricity and gasoline in kWh, joules, electronvolts, calories, BTU, MWh, etc., the end result is the same: EV owners pay scam prices for ENERGY (electricity) at DCFCs compared to what ICE drives pay for ENERGY (gasoline) at the pump.
It's not rocket science nor does one need a PhD in Economics to figure that out.

LoL. Forest from the trees... Basic home electricity prices are already higher than gas prices. And yet it's completely irrelevant. Concept is simple and doesn't require any degree to grasp it...

 

[bigsky]

Sure, DCFCs must make a profit. Nothing wrong with that. That said, we U.S. taxpayers already are funding these DCFCs, which get corporate welfare/foodstamps from Uncle Sam through the NEVI project, at least as of today. On top of that, EV owners are paying ripoff, extortion prices for electricity. 503% higher prices for energy in my neck of the woods compared to ICE energy.

 

[Zorg]

Sure, DCFCs must make a profit. Nothing wrong with that. That said, we U.S. taxpayers already are funding these DCFCs, which get corporate welfare/foodstamps from Uncle Sam through the NEVI project, at least as of today. On top of that, EV owners are paying ripoff, extortion prices for electricity. 503% higher prices for energy in my neck of the woods compared to ICE energy.

I already did the math for you. In my neck of the woods, demand charges plus KWh cost is around $0.40-0.45 per KWh at current utilization rates. And that's before rent, depreciation and maintenance. I doubt they're making money at $0.63...

 

[POLAR1S]

most places are still 37 cents per kwh (or around there) which is still pretty cheap for a fast charger..

my 2020 RRS V8 got 13.5 mpg to mammoth with $5.35 for gas that comes out to .396 per mile.
R1S Gen 2 DMP gets 2.2 mi/kwh there so 37 cents .168 per mile.
at 68 cents it comes out to .309 per mile which is still cheaper than my RRS.

Actually one time I got 1.49 mi/kwh going there lol in that case it came out to .453 haha.
Still not bad because I charge at home before going up there. my off peak with tax is almost 25 cents per kwh but with solar it brings it down about half.

Well time to start referring so you get free charging lol. A bit bummed is capped at 3 years but my lease is done in 3 so I'm okay with it cause I'm locked into 3 years for now.

 

[captainjp]

Not in the world I have grown up in. Logic is quite sound. Energy is energy is energy is energy is energy. Please let that sync in. Same thing.
Electricity energy is measured in kWh; gasoline is measured in gallons. We are talking about the ENERGY content of each.
Whether you measure energy content of both electricity and gasoline in kWh, joules, electronvolts, calories, BTU, MWh, etc., the end result is the same: EV owners pay scam prices for ENERGY (electricity) at DCFCs compared to what ICE drives pay for ENERGY (gasoline) at the pump.
It's not rocket science nor does one need a PhD in Economics to figure that out.

What role does efficiency play in your calculations? At an average of 30% efficiency, ICE drivers utilize 10kWh per gallon of gasoline.

 

[bigsky]

Here's another apples-to-apples comparison, a sobering thought for sure.
What used to be the poster child for very expensive energy: natural gas.
A THERM of natural gas around here will cost you $1.78. Correspondingly, at $0.68 per kWh, a THERM of electricity will run you $19.93. That's a 1,019% cost differential.
No matter which way you must want to slice it, said before, will continue to say it, any reasonable person would conclude that the price of energy at DCFCs is absurd at best.
The argument some make that EVs are more efficient than ICE cars; therefore okay with these prices, does not wash, either. Exhibit A: an ICE motorcycle (far more "efficient" than a truck) pays the same price for gas as the truck does.

Very glad to have my Tesla Model S to road trip in; it has free/gratis/$0.00 electricity at Tesla superchargers for life, no fine print. Gracias, musk!

 

[SANZC02]

Not in the world I have grown up in. Logic is quite sound. Energy is energy is energy is energy is energy. Please let that sync in. Same thing.
Electricity energy is measured in kWh; gasoline is measured in gallons. We are talking about the ENERGY content of each.
Whether you measure energy content of both electricity and gasoline in kWh, joules, electronvolts, calories, BTU, MWh, etc., the end result is the same: EV owners pay scam prices for ENERGY (electricity) at DCFCs compared to what ICE drives pay for ENERGY (gasoline) at the pump.
It's not rocket science nor does one need a PhD in Economics to figure that out.

Not arguing the point of the unit of measurement just that your application of it here makes no sense.

We are not talking about base energy units, you are. Mostly everyone else in this thread is talking about the practical application of those units and the cost per mile.

To lambaste people on an EV forum for applying the practical use of the energy based on the associated cost to convert that into a real world cost analysis seems disingenuous. Sure it is accurate but not very useful in the application comparing cost to drive an EV on a road trip to a Gasoline vehicle.

————————————————————————————————————————————
Efficiency and consumption
Main article: Fuel economy in automobiles
To start, only a fraction of the stored energy of a given fuel (measured in BTU or kW-hr) can be converted to useful work by the vehicle's engine. The measure of this is engine efficiency, often called thermal efficiency in the case of internal combustion engines. A diesel cycle engine can be as much as 40% to 50% efficient at converting fuel into work,[2] where a typical automotive gasoline engine's efficiency is about 25% to 30%.[3][4]

In general, an engine is designed to run on a single fuel source and substituting one fuel for another may affect the thermal efficiency. Each fuel–engine combination requires adjusting the mix of air and fuel. This can be a manual adjustment using tools and test instruments or done automatically in computer-controlled fuel injected and multi-fuel vehicles. Forced induction for an internal combustion engine using supercharger or turbocharger may also affect the optimum fuel–air mix and thermal efficiency.

The overall efficiency of converting a unit of fuel to useful work (rotation of the driving wheels) includes consideration of thermal efficiency along with dynamic losses that are inherent and specific to the design of a given vehicle. Thermal efficiency is affected by both friction and heat losses; for internal combustion engines, some of the stored energy is lost as heat through the exhaust or cooling system. In addition, friction inside the engine happens along the cylinder walls, crankshaft rod bearings and main bearings, camshaft bearings, drive chains or gears, plus other miscellaneous and minor bearing surfaces. Other dynamic losses can be caused by friction outside the motor/engine, including loads from the generator / alternator, power steering pump, A/C compressor, transmission, transfer case (if four-wheel-drive), differential(s) and universal joints, plus rolling resistance of the pneumatic tires. The vehicle's external styling affects its aerodynamic drag, which is another dynamic loss that must be considered for overall efficiency.

In battery or electric vehicles, calculating the vehicle's overall efficiency of useful work begins with the charge–discharge rate of the battery pack, generally 80% to 90%. Next is the conversion of stored energy to distance traveled under power. Generally speaking, an electrical motor is far more efficient than an internal combustion engine at converting the stored potential energy into useful work; in an electric vehicle, traction motor efficiency can approach 90%, as there is minimal waste heat coming off the motor parts, and zero heat cast off by the coolant radiator and out of the exhaust. An electric motor typically has internal friction only at the main axle bearings.[citation needed] Additional losses will affect the overall efficiency, similar to a conventional internal combustion car, including rolling resistance, aerodynamic drag, accessory power, climate control, and drivetrain losses. See table below translating retail electricity costs for a GGE in BTU.

Overall efficiency is measured and reported, typically by government testing, through operating the vehicle in a standardized driving cycle designed to replicate typical use, while providing a consistent basis for comparison between vehicles. Cars sold in the United States are advertised by their measured overall efficiency (fuel economy) in miles per gallon (mpg). The MPG of a given vehicle starts with the thermal efficiency of the fuel and engine, less all of the above elements of friction. The fuel consumption is an equivalent measure for cars sold outside the United States, typically measured in litres per 100 km traveled; in general, the fuel consumption and miles per gallon would be reciprocals with appropriate conversion factors, but because different countries use different driving cycles to measure fuel consumption, fuel economy and fuel consumption are not always directly comparable.

Miles per gallon of gasoline equivalent (MPGe)
Main article: Miles per gallon gasoline equivalent
The MPGe metric was introduced in November 2010 by EPA in the Monroney labelof the Nissan Leaf electric car and the Chevrolet Volt plug-in hybrid. The ratings are based on EPA's formula, in which 33.7 kilowatt hours of electricity is equivalent to one gallon of gasoline (giving a heating value of 115,010 BTU/US gal), and the energy consumption of each vehicle during EPA's five standard drive cycle testssimulating varying driving conditions.[5][6] All new cars and light-duty trucks sold in the U.S. are required to have this label showing the EPA's estimate of fuel economy of the vehicle.[7]

Sponsored