I still don't see EV's Replacing ICEs.

STM317 said:

frenchyd said:

In reply to Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) :

So maybe that's about how long it takes some people to adapt to something different. 50 years.  

It's not just consumer adjustment that takes place over time. The products are improved as well.

Automatic transmissions used to be less efficient and slower than a manually shifted transmission. That's no longer the case thanks to a whole bunch of people devoting a bunch of time and money to improving automatics.

My first inclination is wrong.   I wanted to say something along the line•••• Of Course, Naturally.  Everything improves over time. That's the power of the market place.  
      But I don't know!!  Imagine a lead acid battery powered EV in 1959.   We don't commute more  than back then.  
    Dad still would be able to get to work.  The car could have been built and sold for less than 1/2 of what w VW cost. Back then electricity really was penny cheap.   Gas was .23/9 a gallon. But electricity was .013  dad's Chevy  cost him $20 a week for gas. 
      Etc.  
people were buying VW's and Morris Minors. Because they were cheaper and got better fuel mileage. 
   

frenchyd said:

STM317 said:

frenchyd said:

In reply to Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) :

So maybe that's about how long it takes some people to adapt to something different. 50 years.  

It's not just consumer adjustment that takes place over time. The products are improved as well.

Automatic transmissions used to be less efficient and slower than a manually shifted transmission. That's no longer the case thanks to a whole bunch of people devoting a bunch of time and money to improving automatics.

My first inclination is wrong.   I wanted to say something along the line•••• Of Course, Naturally.  Everything improves over time. That's the power of the market place.  
      But I don't know!!  Imagine a lead acid battery powered EV in 1959.   We don't commute more  than back then.  
    Dad still would be able to get to work.  The car could have been built and sold for less than 1/2 of what w VW cost. Back then electricity really was penny cheap.   Gas was .23/9 a gallon. But electricity was .013  dad's Chevy  cost him $20 a week for gas. 
      Etc.  
people were buying VW's and Morris Minors. Because they were cheaper and got better fuel mileage. 
   

So back in 1902 my great grandfather was working on a design for an electric car (it never came to fruition).

Point being EVs really aren't new; what is new is solving the majority of the issues that kept them from being a fringe vehicle. We shall see where all this goes. 

Pretty simple this whole EV vs ICE for me. Had a 2021 Prius Prime, got it for $18,000 new after all the rebates and discounts. Loved the car, they are very well built and do what they are designed for perfectly. Electricity is now up to 35 cents per kilowatt which means it costs far more to run the Prime on electricity vs gasoline. So I traded the Prime in with 15,000 miles for $28,000 toward a 2022 Forte LXS for my wife and got a check back for $6000.  Top that off with the fact the Forte is getting 40mpg backroads commute. Owning a plug in hybrid or a full EV makes ZERO sense from a financial standpoint here in New England at 34 cents per kilowatt. 

This a fun site I found that shows the true cost to drive these EV vehicles vs Gasoline vehicles.

Eversource Electric Vehicle Information (chooseev.com)

Here's mine.  I picked the cheapest 2015 Tesla and compared it to my 2006 Chevy Express van.  $142/mo savings is not a price point at which I feel warm and squishy about purchasing a 10-year old vehicle that still commands $30k.  Even if I change the EV car to a 2017 Hyundai Ioniq, I'm still looking at north of $22k for for a savings of $129/mo.  If the savings equaled the finance payment on a $30k car, I'd think about it today.

In reply to 2023BD :

With a hybrid you have both worlds. You pay for gas and ICE maintenance plus electricity. 
       At 35  cents  a KWh you should put solar panels on your roof and turn a profit. 
  My state puts them up for nothing out of pocket.  It's not that they are free, you pay for them with the electricity you don't use but sell to your neighbors.  
     This is a good deal for you, your neighbors and the power company. 
 Plus your state. 
  Here's how it works and why it's good. 
  Transit losses are what is wasted by the electric company. Sending electricity on power lines causes transit losses. How much depends on a lot of things so don't let anyone give you a simple answer.  
     Some electric companies can lose over 40% of the power generated.  However your surplus  electricity used by your neighbor  will have almost no transit loss. ( because the distance is so short). 
        Electric companies can and have to make a profit.   It's a business not a charity. But if as much as 40% of what is generated is lost, that's like throwing money away. 
 It's worse than that.  Demand for electricity is always growing.  So they have to build bigger and bigger plants   You have to pay for that.   
     Peak usage is during working hours and dies down as the evening goes on. 
Perfect for solar panels.  
    My state is allowing the utility companies to use the money they have set aside to pay for new power plant   To put up solar panels. 
    You pay your regular electric bill and anything you don't use they sell to your neighbors. And use that to pay off the cost of the panels.  Here in Minnesota  it takes 9-11 years to do that.   
  But the other benefit you get with solar panels.  Is you rate never goes up. 
  At some time in the future your electric rate will be 70 cents instead of 35. Unless you have a set of panels. Then it stays at 35. 
      Why is it good for your state?      The fuel used to make electricity Natural Gas, oil, or coal comes from out of state.  Texas, Kentucky,  Pennsylvania where ever. 
   That's money your state can't spend on things your state could use.  

In reply to frenchyd :

Seeing as how my house is 835 sq ft and surrounded by trees, solar isn't an option for me.  My house was also converted from a 19th century chicken coop into a house in 1900, so the roof has trouble supporting its own weight, let alone PV panels.

But I would LOVE to add solar.  Just not enough roof space in the sun to make it work.

PA also doesn't pay much for juice back to the grid.  The laws here say they HAVE to pay you for surplus juice that turns your meter backwards, but it doesn't say how MUCH they have to pay.  They can charge me 34 cents for what flows in, but pay me 1.3 cents for what goes out.

In reply to Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) :

Most states here in the Midwest give you last years rate for your excess.  They make the difference as profit.   That's a great deal for them. They earn money without any costs.   At least Minnesota,  Iowa , and Wisconsin.  States I sold wind generators in.   It's not exactly that and there were a few more hoops in Wisconsin  but for quick and dirty numbers to see if it's feasible  those work. 
 

 Oh and I have plenty of roof strength but big trees on the property line. ( so shade)  

    Plus the house to the south of me while I can use the roof now at some point ( it's only 1.5 million )  the land will be bought, the house torn down and another maximum size home for the site put up. Shading my roof. 

Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) said:

In reply to frenchyd :

Seeing as how my house is 835 sq ft and surrounded by trees, solar isn't an option for me.  My house was also converted from a 19th century chicken coop into a house in 1900, so the roof has trouble supporting its own weight, let alone PV panels.

But I would LOVE to add solar.  Just not enough roof space in the sun to make it work.

PA also doesn't pay much for juice back to the grid.  The laws here say they HAVE to pay you for surplus juice that turns your meter backwards, but it doesn't say how MUCH they have to pay.  They can charge me 34 cents for what flows in, but pay me 1.3 cents for what goes out.

Solar doesn't necessarily have to be on the roof.  If you have an appropriate spot near the house, you can do a pole mount setup (and I've seen some done that will track the sun angle for better output from a given size install). 

In reply to rslifkin :

I have 0.18 acres.  I can't add a 4x8 shed. 

In reply to rslifkin :

ground-mounted solar is generally quite a bit more expensive than roof-mounted, and you still have to deal with trees on a wooded lot, sometimes even more so. We put solar on our roof, and even in Michigan it's been a good investment, and it's a great hedge against future energy prices. Even a very small system like ours (3.6 kw) is more than enough to offset the use for two EVs. 

34 cents/ KwH is insane, I thought Michigan was bad at 18. A quick Google shows the most expensive continental US state is New Hampshire, averaging 30.44 cents in 2022.

frenchyd said:

      But I don't know!!  Imagine a lead acid battery powered EV in 1959.   We don't commute more  than back then.  
    Dad still would be able to get to work.  The car could have been built and sold for less than 1/2 of what w VW cost. Back then electricity really was penny cheap.   Gas was .23/9 a gallon. But electricity was .013  dad's Chevy  cost him $20 a week for gas. 
      Etc.  
people were buying VW's and Morris Minors. Because they were cheaper and got better fuel mileage. 
   

People drive a lot more nowadays than they used to, as more people live in the suburbs and fewer in the city. In 1983 the average commute was 8.9 miles. Now it's closer to 20 miles one-way. EVs would work a lot better if we returned to 1950s America commute patterns. 

In reply to Erich :

Even the least capable EV today.  The Chevy Bolt has  290 miles range?  Assume you travel 50 miles each way. Plug it into a 110  outlet overnight and at the end of the week you'll still have juice to get home.    
    220 outlet? Full tank every night. 
 No more trips to the gas station so you'll get 10 more minutes of sleep every night.  And at the end of the month? Instead of   Paying a $320 visa bill. You'll pay $60 more on your electric bill

In reply to frenchyd :

The Bolt is rated at 259miles, not 290. And it's not the shortest range EV out there.

People in the NE are currently paying $0.34/kwh which makes charging their EV's equal to or more expensive than gasoline. Public chargers can be even higher. It's not reality to claim that it's much cheaper than an ICE across the board. It can be. In some locations at some times.

If you can't do some form of renewable power generation on your own property, you'll always be subject to uncertain pricing of fuel/electricity. Sometimes an EV is cheaper, and sometimes cheap gas makes an ICE cheaper to operate. PHEVs give the owner the option of using whichever energy type is  cheapest.

An EV plus a renewable power source is a fantastic combo for controlling costs. It's better in some places than others of course due to geography, weather and government incentives.

2023 Bolt EV base model $28,000  -  2023 Kia Forte LXS with tech pkg $22,000

2023 Bolt $88 month for electricity - 2023 Forte $91 month for gasoline (this is based on the 32mpg avg but we actually avg 38)

Gasoline vehicle savings is $6000. 

Plus you can park the Forte indoors without the possibility of the house burning down while you sleep inside it. 

Even a 2023 F150 5.0L V8 is cheaper to operate vs a 2023 Ford Lightning. And again no fears of burning the house down.

2023BD said:

2023 Bolt EV base model $28,000  -  2023 Kia Forte LXS with tech pkg $22,000

2023 Bolt $88 month for electricity - 2023 Forte $91 month for gasoline (this is based on the 32mpg avg but we actually avg 38)

Gasoline vehicle savings is $6000. 

Plus you can park the Forte indoors without the possibility of the house burning down while you sleep inside it. 

Even a 2023 F150 5.0L V8 is cheaper to operate vs a 2023 Ford Lightning. And again no fears of burning the house down.

So... this isn't even remotely accurate.

Which part do you feel is not accurate? That is all easily verifiable info. 

In reply to 2023BD :

Good,  go buy whatever you want.  It's your choice. 
    Me? Our electricity is less than 1/2 of yours.  Plus we can get solar panels installed for nothing up front and pay for them in 9-11 years  with the electricity we generate.  
From then on we get a check from the utility company for any excess  we create and our electricity is free !!!  
       Oh and you forgot. We get a $7500 tax rebate. 
  Plus we won't ever need to change the oil on an EV.  And Brake jobs will be rare events due to Regenerative braking.  

   The reason you aren't hearing  anything more about houses burning down is the defective batteries installed in a few Chevy Bolts  was promptly dealt with by GM under warranty and all of those battery's.  
   Every one. Was Replaced. Free. 
  You will keep on hearing about gasoline fires. Well,  probably not because it's so common.  
 Know what fire fighters call a car on fire on the side of the road?  
      CAR-B-Que 

 Actually  I have several ICE  cars. I'm a serious gear head.  I love working on the race car. A V12 is a really nice piece of engineering and extremely well built. 
  But for transportation?  Commuting      to and from work, shopping,  visiting family and friends.  
 I'll take an EV over an ICE 

   But you are free to buy whatever you want.  

2023BD said:

Which part do you feel is not accurate? That is all easily verifiable info. 

There is not a realistic risk of a fire with a post-recall Bolt.

The cost to operate a Bolt is, in my own experience, around 4.1 mi/kwh, which in my area translates to $.03/mile. The cost to operate your 38 MPG ICE example in my area (which has some of the cheapest gas in the country) currently is $.08/mile. The $6K difference you state would be made up in 120K miles when just considering gasoline. You'll have to plug in your areas electricity and gasoline costs. This does not include oil changes, brakes transmission fluid changes and a coolant change in there. Figure the math works out to be closer to 100K break-even miles in your own example.

I track my costs pretty closely, and I was replacing a vehicle which got a much-more-typical 29 mpg. I've saved myself $6K so far in just about 70k miles, of course I am tracking the gas prices monthly to compare.

Amazingly enough, plenty of houses have burned down due to a gas vehicle in the garage catching fire. And families have been killed due to accidentally leaving the ICE car running in an attached garage. But I wouldn't use either of those as reasons to get an EV because I'm not arguing from emotion, I'm interested in dispassionate facts.

Forgot about the $7500, that does make them closer. Don't forget you only get that if your tax liability is that high. Otherwise you only get the amount of tax liability you have. Remember EV's are for the rich. Brakes are good for over 50,000 miles these days and lof is about $300 over 50,000 miles. I loved the Prius Prime we owned. We drove it as a full electric 90% of the time. So as a daily an EV drives wonderful. It simply did not make sense economically anymore. Solar is a whole other debate that has pros and cons.

In reply to 2023BD :

I'm far from rich.  But because my wife and I work we pay taxes.  I'll get the full $7500.  You know the saying Death and taxes. 
  Actually our taxes are too cheap.  Here in America we pay the least of any industrialized country. But we also die younger than most on average.  Pay at least twice as much for health care  and are 8th through 22nd by measuring standards. 
      Plus we hate our politicians. And  are like 9th in happiness.  Oh and height  wise we are shrinking. Average male is 5'9"   Tallest average are well over 6'. 
     Sometimes you've got to look past things like price and figure out what you are getting for what you are paying. 
        Look at your electric rates. Compare them to the Midwest. We are not the cheapest.  I think Washington State  is.    Somebody is getting rich.  

dculberson said:

Amazingly enough, plenty of houses have burned down due to a gas vehicle in the garage catching fire. And families have been killed due to accidentally leaving the ICE car running in an attached garage. But I wouldn't use either of those as reasons to get an EV because I'm not arguing from emotion, I'm interested in dispassionate facts.

Well said.  I responded foolishly and I should have just ignored the bait.  
I'm really sorry. 

tuna55 said:

2023BD said:

Which part do you feel is not accurate? That is all easily verifiable info. 

There is not a realistic risk of a fire with a post-recall Bolt.

The cost to operate a Bolt is, in my own experience, around 4.1 mi/kwh, which in my area translates to $.03/mile. The cost to operate your 38 MPG ICE example in my area (which has some of the cheapest gas in the country) currently is $.08/mile. The $6K difference you state would be made up in 120K miles when just considering gasoline. You'll have to plug in your areas electricity and gasoline costs. This does not include oil changes, brakes transmission fluid changes and a coolant change in there. Figure the math works out to be closer to 100K break-even miles in your own example.

I track my costs pretty closely, and I was replacing a vehicle which got a much-more-typical 29 mpg. I've saved myself $6K so far in just about 70k miles, of course I am tracking the gas prices monthly to compare.

Well documented. Thank you for those numbers. 

tuna55 said:

 

 

 

The cost to operate a Bolt is, in my own experience, around 4.1 mi/kwh, which in my area translates to $.03/mile. 

 

I need to get out of New England. Your whole electric bill really works out to $.12/kwh. We are getting robbed here in New England at $.34/khw.  Thats 3x more expensive for electricity vs what you pay. Well I change my stance... EV does not work for New England but they can work if you live in the Carolinas.