3 ms·

Only if you do this weird unrealistic math. Usually you need to install some infrastructure or deal with overnight slow charging. Thats if you even have a spot

Only if you do this weird unrealistic math. Usually you need to install some infrastructure or deal with overnight slow charging. Thats if you even have a spot at home for this. Factor in your time hunting for a charger or waiting around for the car, depending on how you value your time, and maybe filling up the gas car for $40 in 3 minutes really is cheaper when you’ve accounted for all the inconvenience you might be saddled with.

boyka 3y ago
Also in most countries of this world, charging an EV effectively means charging with a majority of energy derived from burning gasoline (or equivalents).
- bwanab 3y ago
  In most countries where EV adoption is progressing you can count on a turnover of electric power generation from fossil to non-fossil sources. As that happens, EVs become greener and greener. Gas cars are still going to be gas cars.
- grecy 3y ago
  You, ah, might want to check your numbers. Fully 70 countries in the world generate more than 50% of their energy from renewables [1], and it's climbing rapidly. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_renewable_electricity_production https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_renewable...
- vinni2 3y ago
  Electricity produced at scale using fossil fuels is more cleaner than ICE cars. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-15/electric-cars-seen-getting-cleaner-even-where-grids-rely-on-coal https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-15/electric-...
- tzs 3y ago
  If you burn gasoline in an ICE car only about 30% of the energy of that gasoline ends up actually going to propelling your vehicle. The rest is mostly lost as waste heat. Burn it in a combined cycle power plant to convert it to electricity and there are still substantial loses to waste heat but much less than when burning it an ICE car. There will be some smaller losses in the power grid and charging infrastructure to get that electricity into your battery, and some small losses in your EV's electric powertrain, but in the end around 40% of the energy of the fuel ends up going toward propelling your vehicle.
ojbyrne 3y ago
The article starts with the phrase “The price of home charging”
oh_sigh 3y ago
I got a 40A outlet installed in my garage for $400 after a state rebate for EV chargers at home. In the past 2 years I've used a non-home charger 3 times, only on long distances road trips. I charge the car maybe twice a week, and when I do it takes literally 5 seconds as in walking by to plug it in. I would say an EV is far more cost and time effective for my circumstances.
mglz 3y ago
(Disclaimer: The following applies to western Europe) > Factor in your time hunting for a charger Not really an issue, there is a large variety of apps to navigate you to a charger and check availiability beforehand. > waiting around for the car In my experience when on the highway the time you need for a break (toilet, eating, relaxing) is equal or less than the time the car needs to charge. If you are shopping, your car will be done charging before you finish. > Usually you need to install some infrastructure or deal with overnight slow charging. If you are just using the car in the city for short trips you only need to change every 1-2 weeks. In that case you can just go to a quick charge station which many gas stations are installing now in paralell to their pumps. The problem I see right now: While consumer prices are 0.3€/kWh at home, quick chargers demand 0.65€/kWh, which is insane.
bwanab 3y ago
I charged my Tesla on US 110 volts for several years just plugging into an outlet. Overnight, it got me plenty of charge for a normal day of driving. You're building a case based on faulty assumptions.
yathern 3y ago
What's unrealistic about this math? Just because the math involves new parameters (EG amortized cost of charging infrastructure & cost of electricity) doesn't mean it's fabricated. Even level 1 charging (as you call it "overnight slow charging") gives you ~5 miles per hour and only requires a cheap charger of ~200 bucks. Charge it from 8PM to 6AM and you get 50 miles of range. If you have a <50 mile commute, you can charge from 8PM to 6AM, and your work commute is taken care of. Charge a little longer on weekends and you can budget further. This situation might not work for everyone! Street parking of course makes this nearly impossible. But A LOT of Americans have a <50 mile commute, and a garage with an outlet. For these people, they're saving money every day, and never have to use a gas station ever again. In this situation you'll pay off that initial $200 in ~8 months. But even disregarding financial savings, many may simply prefer the tradeoff of not having to go to gas stations in exchange for plugging in when they return home. Then, if you need to go on a >200 mile trip, you have to use a public charger, and the math is less favorable as those will cost more and you'll have to hang out for a bit. But once again, you need to consider how often this is an occurance for you. For some people, it's weekly (or daily!). For some it's once a month or once a year. I agree that we're not at the place where from cost savings alone, it is maximally effective for everyone, but I don't think it's unrealistic for a very large portion of Americans.
rainsford 3y ago
Not only is the math not unrealistic, but I'd argue EVs have a fairy obvious structural advantage that makes their convenience advantage clear without having to do math at all. A large percentage of personal vehicles mostly take short distance trips between which they spend the vast majority of their life parked at one of a handful of consistent locations. Even with slow charging, EVs have ample opportunity to "refuel" with no additional time investment. As for monetary cost, the electricity to refuel an EV can be generated by a huge number of sources to leverage the cheapest (or greenest if that's what you want to optimize for) ones and be centralized to take advantage of economies of scale. Even if the electricity is fossil fuel generated, a power plant can be far more efficient at turning that fossil fuel into energy than your car engine can. This is different than saying this charging reality is true for everyone right this second, but they key point is that it's possible for EVs while it is fundamentally impossible for traditional internal combustion vehicles. Your ICE car is never going to be able to be refueled at home overnight or at work during the day. It will never be able to take advantage of solar or wind or nuclear energy. Refueling an ICE car might be fairly convenient now, but this is as good as it gets, it's never going to get any better. My current situation doesn't allow me to charge an EV at work or home, so it would be marginally less convenient for me. But that's pretty fixable in the grand scheme of things, while I'm never going to be able to refuel my ICE car while I sleep. Anyone doing the comparison between ICE and EV now and not accounting for all the extra upside room to grow EVs still have (and ICE does not) is definitely missing the forest for the trees.

boyka 3y ago

Also in most countries of this world, charging an EV effectively means charging with a majority of energy derived from burning gasoline (or equivalents).

bwanab 3y ago
In most countries where EV adoption is progressing you can count on a turnover of electric power generation from fossil to non-fossil sources. As that happens, EVs become greener and greener. Gas cars are still going to be gas cars.
grecy 3y ago
You, ah, might want to check your numbers. Fully 70 countries in the world generate more than 50% of their energy from renewables [1], and it's climbing rapidly. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_renewable_electricity_production https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_renewable...
vinni2 3y ago
Electricity produced at scale using fossil fuels is more cleaner than ICE cars. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-15/electric-cars-seen-getting-cleaner-even-where-grids-rely-on-coal https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-15/electric-...
tzs 3y ago
If you burn gasoline in an ICE car only about 30% of the energy of that gasoline ends up actually going to propelling your vehicle. The rest is mostly lost as waste heat. Burn it in a combined cycle power plant to convert it to electricity and there are still substantial loses to waste heat but much less than when burning it an ICE car. There will be some smaller losses in the power grid and charging infrastructure to get that electricity into your battery, and some small losses in your EV's electric powertrain, but in the end around 40% of the energy of the fuel ends up going toward propelling your vehicle.

ojbyrne 3y ago

The article starts with the phrase “The price of home charging”

oh_sigh 3y ago

I got a 40A outlet installed in my garage for $400 after a state rebate for EV chargers at home. In the past 2 years I've used a non-home charger 3 times, only on long distances road trips. I charge the car maybe twice a week, and when I do it takes literally 5 seconds as in walking by to plug it in. I would say an EV is far more cost and time effective for my circumstances.

mglz 3y ago

(Disclaimer: The following applies to western Europe) > Factor in your time hunting for a charger Not really an issue, there is a large variety of apps to navigate you to a charger and check availiability beforehand. > waiting around for the car In my experience when on the highway the time you need for a break (toilet, eating, relaxing) is equal or less than the time the car needs to charge. If you are shopping, your car will be done charging before you finish. > Usually you need to install some infrastructure or deal with overnight slow charging. If you are just using the car in the city for short trips you only need to change every 1-2 weeks. In that case you can just go to a quick charge station which many gas stations are installing now in paralell to their pumps. The problem I see right now: While consumer prices are 0.3€/kWh at home, quick chargers demand 0.65€/kWh, which is insane.

bwanab 3y ago

I charged my Tesla on US 110 volts for several years just plugging into an outlet. Overnight, it got me plenty of charge for a normal day of driving. You're building a case based on faulty assumptions.

yathern 3y ago

What's unrealistic about this math? Just because the math involves new parameters (EG amortized cost of charging infrastructure & cost of electricity) doesn't mean it's fabricated. Even level 1 charging (as you call it "overnight slow charging") gives you ~5 miles per hour and only requires a cheap charger of ~200 bucks. Charge it from 8PM to 6AM and you get 50 miles of range. If you have a <50 mile commute, you can charge from 8PM to 6AM, and your work commute is taken care of. Charge a little longer on weekends and you can budget further. This situation might not work for everyone! Street parking of course makes this nearly impossible. But A LOT of Americans have a <50 mile commute, and a garage with an outlet. For these people, they're saving money every day, and never have to use a gas station ever again. In this situation you'll pay off that initial $200 in ~8 months. But even disregarding financial savings, many may simply prefer the tradeoff of not having to go to gas stations in exchange for plugging in when they return home. Then, if you need to go on a >200 mile trip, you have to use a public charger, and the math is less favorable as those will cost more and you'll have to hang out for a bit. But once again, you need to consider how often this is an occurance for you. For some people, it's weekly (or daily!). For some it's once a month or once a year. I agree that we're not at the place where from cost savings alone, it is maximally effective for everyone, but I don't think it's unrealistic for a very large portion of Americans.

rainsford 3y ago

Not only is the math not unrealistic, but I'd argue EVs have a fairy obvious structural advantage that makes their convenience advantage clear without having to do math at all. A large percentage of personal vehicles mostly take short distance trips between which they spend the vast majority of their life parked at one of a handful of consistent locations. Even with slow charging, EVs have ample opportunity to "refuel" with no additional time investment. As for monetary cost, the electricity to refuel an EV can be generated by a huge number of sources to leverage the cheapest (or greenest if that's what you want to optimize for) ones and be centralized to take advantage of economies of scale. Even if the electricity is fossil fuel generated, a power plant can be far more efficient at turning that fossil fuel into energy than your car engine can. This is different than saying this charging reality is true for everyone right this second, but they key point is that it's possible for EVs while it is fundamentally impossible for traditional internal combustion vehicles. Your ICE car is never going to be able to be refueled at home overnight or at work during the day. It will never be able to take advantage of solar or wind or nuclear energy. Refueling an ICE car might be fairly convenient now, but this is as good as it gets, it's never going to get any better. My current situation doesn't allow me to charge an EV at work or home, so it would be marginally less convenient for me. But that's pretty fixable in the grand scheme of things, while I'm never going to be able to refuel my ICE car while I sleep. Anyone doing the comparison between ICE and EV now and not accounting for all the extra upside room to grow EVs still have (and ICE does not) is definitely missing the forest for the trees.