EV use can be more expensive than gas

[UnsungZero_OldTimeAdMan]

Yea its actually more, I remembers $800 per one rotor cuz I was gonna do it myself, at dealer, full install would have been also around $2000.

If anywhere near Costa Mesa, CA I recommend BMW specialist Bullet Performance.

Sponsored

 

[IGR]

bLUeDOt

shhh, its a secret!

Spoiler: ?

 

[Osyras]

Have you ever compared your expenses on ev vs gas. I used my r1s this weekend and charged it a bit at a public charging station. It was $.50/kwh. It cost me $12.50 for a 57miles added miles. I then realized that it's actually going to cost me more to do a long drive with EV rather than a gas SUV. I would spend about $60 to get about 400 miles added for a range rover evoque while it would end up costing me about $87 to charge multiple times to get up to 400 miles added.

What are your experiences? Is charging in public always going to be costly?

I went from Niagara Falls to Sandusky Ohio this week and the it was cheaper than my F150 but more expensive than the Ford Escape we got rid of.
(all costs in CAD)

(tesla, RAN, Blink, EV Connect and Electrify America)

That works out to 19.00/100km, my f150 takes about 13l/100km and at 1.75/l that is $22.00/100km and the old escape was 10l/100k that would have been $17.50/100km

If you look though the Tesla and the charger at Matews Ford (Blink Network) were really really effing expensive so ultimately comes down to better planning and research on my part.

The good thing is that 95% of our charging is done at home so expensive charging is definitely not the norm.

 

[atebit]

I don’t have to depend on foreign oil for my electricity. That’s all that matters to me.

 

[Texas Mac]

EV car is not a good finance decision. You spend more money on EV tax, depreciation due technology change, tires, etc.

If you charge at home it is cheaper than gas, public chargers are 1.5-3x more expensive than gas.

It is fun to drive, it is nice gadget , but not a good finance decision

And what real numbers are you using to come to this conclusion?

Here are the numbers that come straight out of electrafi for my truck.

In the month of May, I paid a maximum of $73.96 to put 410.30 kWh into the battery. I say maximum as I have solar at home and any excess solar goes directly into the truck, but I don't have tracking set up for that... yet. This also includes a stop at an EVGO and Supercharger station on a road trip.

Overall mileage in May was 821 miles. If I use a 2024 Tacoma TRD PRO as a comparable truck, that averages 20 mpg. To travel the comparable mileage in a Tacoma, it would take 41 gallons of gas, The average price of gas in Dallas/Fort Worth in May has been $3.15. This would put the price of gas to drive the Tacoma the same distance at $130.

So for one month, I spent $60 less on electricity than I would have in gas. Using that as a baseline, I would have saved $720 in fuel costs for the entire year. To make it fair, I also have to pay $200/year more to register an EV in Texas. So now I’ve only saved $520. However, I’m going to assume you are going to change oil in the Tacoma twice in a year, so figure $100 for each oil change and now I’m back to saving $720/year,

Then you could also go into how much is your time worth to you? Charging happens at home at night after I’m done for the day. No wasting time at a gas station or being tempted to buy overpriced snacks and beverages while I fill up.

I guess you could also talk about insurance rates. In my case, I pay less for my R1T than I do for my Dodge Durango.

So how is an EV a bad financial decision?

 

[RivianRunner]

If you want low cost per mile, buy a mechanically sound used ICE vehicle from an individual. Everything else is just degrees of wasting money.

I disagree. A used EV will save you more money than a used ICE vehicle, in general. Not only will electricity cost less than gas, so will the maintenance.

Whether it's gas or electric, buy an efficient passenger car, not an SUV. For example, a good solid used Model 3 can be purchased for around $15K with only 150,000 miles on the odometer. With a battery lifespan of 350,000-500,000 miles, you will have years of motoring left, as well as having access to the entire Supercharger Network at the base rates, without needing a subscription. And your consumption will average around 250 Wh/mile, instead of nearly double that!

It always costs a lot more to drive an SUV or truck, regardless of gas or electric.

 

[s4wrxttcs]

450 mile comparison with home charging at either side

Rivian R1T -> Going to assume a 2 miles / kWh efficiency and a cost of 10 cents per kW. This works out to be $22.50

Camper Van -> Roughly 16mpg with an average cost of $4.00 per gallon is about $112.50

The Rivian saves me about $90, but if I relied on public charging at 50 cents per kW it wouldn't save me any money.

In any case BOTH vehicles are horribly inefficient. Both vehicles are absolutely silly to be used to move a 190 pound human 450 miles.

 

[CharonPDX]

Alright, let's tackle this.

50 cents/kWh is on the expensive side. There are plenty of cheaper charging networks out there, and cost can be location-dependent, just like with gas. (And where charging tends to be "a little more expensive" gas tends to be *WAY* more expensive.)

An Evoque is not the same class of vehicle as R1S. A Defender 130 is a closer match. It'd be like comparing the R1T to a Hyundai Santa Cruz instead of a Jeep Gladiator.

Yes, public high speed charging does make the *fueling* cost near the same, or even slightly higher, depending on local electricity and gasoline prices.

So when I go on long road trips with my R1T, towing a trailer, you're right - it isn't that much cheaper than when I did the same with my old F-250 diesel.

But when charging at home overnight, I pay less per mile than a *PRIUS*. For a pickup with more capability then the old F-250 diesel it replaced.

Then there's the savings on maintenance.

And the fact that when road tripping with my trailer, I can (sometimes) recharge at the campground/RV parks I'm stopped at overnight, which is basically "free fuel" (since it's included in the cost of the campground/RV park wether I'm driving an EV or not.)

 

[UnsungZero_OldTimeAdMan]

I don’t have to depend on foreign oil for my electricity. That’s all that matters to me.

Unless your local grid is fed by petrol burning generators. Some of that petrol would be derived from imported crude. Majority of utility-grade powerplants in the US make electricity from fossil fuels. https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&t=21

 

[RivianRunner]

Let's keep politics out of this. If you think EV manufacturing is clean and slave work on mines is fine, think again.

There is nothing political about wanting to breathe clean air on the highway!

Where did you get that idea?

Manufacturing everything has an environmental footprint. The somewhat higher footprint of EV manufacture only is valid if the car never drives more than about 15K-30K miles, depending upon the blend of power used for charging. In areas with high hydroelectric, nuclear, wind and/or solar energy, the payback period can be less than a year.

IMO, it should be a basic human right to breathe unpolluted air that won't kill or sicken you. The cost to society of air pollution, in terms of healthcare, missed work, and premature death is in the trillions of dollars. This pushes up the price of healthcare insurance and all the products you buy. These are costs of burning oil that are not accounted for. Instead, we give oil companies tax breaks for everything from oil exploration to refining. And drilling and refining itself is dirty business.

Focusing on the higher enviro footprint of initial manufacture of the car itself is a tell-tale sign of an apologist for all these unaccounted-for healthcare costs of ICE engines and their thirst for refined oil products.

 

[RivianRunner]

Unless your local grid is fed by petrol burning generators. Some of that petrol would be derived from imported crude. Majority of utility-grade powerplants in the US make electricity from fossil fuels. https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&t=21

Not really. According to the link you cited, over 98% of fossil fuel used to generate electricity comes from coal and natural gas. You don't have to be a whiz kid to know that very close to 100% of that is sourced right here in N. America.

EVs free us from dependence on fuels from foreigners, many who do not have our best interests in mind. And they keep the air in our cities and highways safe to breathe.

I live within 20 miles of four major oil refineries and, let me tell you, it ain't pretty. Their primary product is liquid fuels for cars and trucks. They consume a lot of that electricity you are so worried about too.

 

[RivianRunner]

And we won’t get into environmental issues caused by rare earth mining and refining.

The difference between mining for batteries and mining for oil, is the old batteries can be recycled endlessly into new batteries, while every tank of fuel you put in an ICE vehicle is lost forever!

 

[s4wrxttcs]

EV car is not a good finance decision. You spend more money on EV tax, depreciation due technology change, tires, etc.

If you charge at home it is cheaper than gas, public chargers are 1.5-3x more expensive than gas.

It is fun to drive, it is nice gadget , but not a good finance decision

I love how you made a blanket statement arguing that an EV isn't a good financial decision while simultaneously knowing that home charging was significantly cheaper than gas.

So why didn't you say it depended on the total cost of ownership that was dependent on the buyers unique situation?

I also don't think depreciation is really linked to technology changes, but instead market forces.

I didn't lose any more money on my 2015 Tesla Model S than I would a German luxury car.
I lost very little money on my 2018 Model 3 due to economic forces at play when I traded it in
I expect my 2022 Rivian R1T to have a very similar curve as most adventure vehicles on the market regardless of whether its an EV or not.

 

[RivianRunner]

It should - but for this we need Nuclear plants (the last one we built was 25 years ago). The problem with Nuclear - is almost impossible to get approvals to build one. We prefer to kill rare birds with wind turbines, and use huge amounts of land for solar instead of building gen 4 nuclear.

Our technology (managed by Westinghouse) is so outdated, that despite sanctions on Russia, Rosatom is exempted from these sanctions as we can not manage our Nuclear sites without Russia.

I'm not anti-nuclear at all, but only when it makes economic sense. Currently, nuclear electricity is the most expensive of any baseload electrical generation. It costs more and takes longer to bring on-line too. Solar and battery storage is competitive with nuclear, once all costs are accounted for. One of the major reasons some areas of the country have such expensive electricity is ratepayers are still paying off the cost of nuclear boondoggles.

 

[shap]

I'm not anti-nuclear at all, but only when it makes economic sense. Currently, nuclear electricity is the most expensive of any baseload electrical generation. It costs more and takes longer to bring on-line too. Solar and battery storage is competitive with nuclear, once all costs are accounted for. One of the major reasons some areas of the country have such expensive electricity is ratepayers are still paying off the cost of nuclear boondoggles.

You are wrong - it is the cheapest and the only really renewable.

Sponsored