2013 Miles. No Gas. Many Hassles. cross country in an EV...

[Fossil]

9 minutes ago, plymouthcranbrook said:

Am I the only one still agitating for hydrogen power? 

No your not and at first glance they look to be a very viable option. Is a Hydrogen powered vehicle more environmentally friendly to build than building an EV? Also what are the impacts of producing the fuel?

If I lived in town and most if not all of my driving was short trips then I'd consider an EV. Rural ownership just doesn't ad up yet. Especially in the cold. 

Are there any charging stations in national parks yet? 

 

 

[Matt Harwood]

TL;DR version:

 

 

Long version:

 

I hate these conversations. So many incorrect assumptions and politically-biased opinions that it's hard to clear the field. Up front, I should say that I'm not a "tree hugger" or radical environmentalist, although I do believe we shouldn't be farking up the planet so badly that it becomes difficult to live here. However, I think many of you mischaracterize the makers and users of electric cars as doing it purely to save the earth rather than as a practical decision. I'm not pro-electric car beyond the fact that I understand it's what's coming and that it represents a good financial decision for a great many consumers. Do any of you even own an electric car?

I do. We've owned one for more than a year now. So let me discuss some of the things that many people misunderstand.

 

One, we pay about $36/month to drive it 750 miles, on average. It fills up in my garage overnight, once every 5-6 days. No matter how you slice it, it is MUCH less expensive to "fill up" and drive than a gasoline automobile. We have twice taken it on an extended highway trip to visit my in-laws, but with a little planning (like a car tour!) we were not at all inconvenienced by it. We planned a stop about halfway to our destination where there was a charger, got some lunch, and when we were done with our meal the car was ready to go. No, not as quick and easy as dumping gasoline in the tank, but not the monumental hardship that everyone imagines. Eventually, that minor inconvenience will be less of an annoyance than $100 fill-ups and people will continue to switch. I'm also confident that battery range and charging technology will continue to improve.

 

Two, how will the power grid withstand the demand? Well, I see two problems with this argument. First, you wrongly assume that all the electric cars will be "filling up" at the same time. This is bad logic--do all the gasoline cars fill up at the same time (and if they did, how would the gasoline infrastructure withstand the demand)? And secondly, you assume that the power grid won't expand and develop to meet demand. The world isn't static and while none of us was there, I'm pretty sure there was once a time when there weren't gas stations on every corner. The infrastructure grew to support the demand. No reason to assume it won't do the same in this case.

 

Three, pollution. What about those toxic minerals used to make batteries, and what about throwing them in landfills? Well, this is wrong in a few ways. I will agree that the minerals are toxic and the mining can be problematic, but it isn't the issue that climate change is. Digging a hole in the ground which looks scary and dirty isn't the same as the atmosphere filling with the by-products of fossil fuel combustion. We're talking throwing a plastic bottle on the ground versus setting it on fire. I'm not making excuses--it's certainly dirty work with its own environmental problems--but the prevailing argument seems to be that since environmentalists want to preserve the Earth, they're hypocrites for allowing the mining to continue to make electric cars and therefore electric cars are a bad thing. Of course, the same people are cheering for a coal comeback so they can keep blowing the tops off mountains and poisoning drinking water and making black smoke at their power generators, but whatever.

 

And once a battery exists, it is typically recycled. The minerals in them don't "wear out," they can be constantly re-used. Nobody's scrapping a used electric car and just throwing the battery in a ditch. It's just too valuable. A vast majority of electric car batteries will be recycled into new electric car batteries, not tossed out where they can do environmental damage.

 

As for the "gotcha" that says electricity is still generated by burning fossil fuels, well, that's mostly true. But more renewable resources will come online and there's no question that natural gas burns a lot more cleanly than gasoline or coal. Electric cars are also more efficient at turning electricity into motion, so considerably fewer pollutants are generated per mile driven than a gasoline car. This particular talking point suggests that many people believe if electric cars don't solve 100% of the problem then we shouldn't even try at all. Making perfect the enemy of good is faulty reasoning.

 

Four, nobody will ever force you to buy an electric car. None of you will live long enough to see gasoline outlawed. None of you will see a time when you can't buy gasoline or where your gasoline automobiles are forbidden. Nobody is floating the idea to legislate people into electric cars. Ultimately, market forces are doing that--why do you hate capitalism?

 

Five, oh God, what about the fires? Yes, electric cars burn differently. However, they also burn far less often, both in terms of gross numbers and per capita, meaning that far more gasoline cars still catch on fire far more often. When an electric car burns it burns hot and there are chemicals, but a problem that adds up to little more than a statistical rounding error isn't going to make the world abandon electric cars.

 

Six, "Well I live in the middle of nowhere and my commute is 495 miles each way and I have to haul 9800 pounds of cargo to work every day at 95 MPH and there's no electric car that can do that for me." Fine, you got me on that one. As I said, nobody will eliminate the trucks we love so much. If you can afford to feed it, someone will happily sell it to you. However, you will see a growing shift towards electric trucks doing local work and sooner or later, a dedicated heavy truck lane on the highway with inductive charging for long distance hauling. But if you need a truck to do truck things, you'll always be able to buy one that burns some liquid for locomotion. Again, nobody is forcing you into an electric egg.

 

Seven, what about the cost of battery replacement? Sure, they're expensive. So is a new engine. Priced a fresh twin turbo V6 in a Ford F150 lately? At least on par with an average electric car battery ($10-12,000). Many people also make the assumption that the batteries wear out and just go dead--they don't. They gradually lose efficiency, but they don't typically just give up the ghost like an engine. They just lose range rather than the sudden and expensive BANG that typifies a combustion engine failure. There are many manufacturers who warrant the batteries longer than they'll warrant a gasoline engine and there are more than a few stories of 300,000+ miles on a battery-powered car, so it seems to come down to owner care as much as anything. And by the way, total cost of ownership is probably cheaper with an electric car given that they don't have transmissions or exhaust systems or oil changes or cooling systems or any of the things that need routine maintenance. They have different maintenance needs and surely different types of components will fail, but most are just a "maybe" unlike the "definitelys" of oil changes, exhaust systems, and other components that require periodic service on a combustion engine. And since the electric motor does most of the braking, electric car brakes are virtually maintenance free, too.

 

Eight, what about the purchase cost? Us regular guys can't afford a fancy electric car! Well, that's partially true I guess. I bought our Audi E-Tron used with 6500 miles on it and paid about 60% of sticker price for it. That's a high-end luxury SUV electric vehicle, not entry level, but the cost of ownership is about the same as the Ford Focus ST that it replaced. And as technology improves, they will surely get cheaper and there will be less expensive models to purchase, both new and used. Remember when a 60-inch flat-screen TV cost $7000? Now you can buy one for $800. That's what technology does--prices always go down. The electric car is where the gasoline car was in 1925. Cross-country trips in 1925 were arduous, the infrastructure was non-existent, and the cars were complex and often unreliable. But things got better, didn't they? It just takes time.

 

Nine, what about getting stranded? You can't just walk to the next town and get more electricity in a can. That's true. But if you're not the type of person who runs out of gas all the time, you probably won't be one who runs out of electricity. It has a gauge like your gas car so you know when you need more electricity--it doesn't suddenly sneak up on you and come to a dead stop. Sure, driving through Death Valley would be a mistake, but for the most part, drivers stay within 100 miles of their home base so finding more juice in an emergency isn't really a factor. With more charging stations popping up all the time, it's getting easier to find electricity when you need it in a pinch. But yes, if you're a moron who runs out of gas regularly, you may also be a moron who runs out of electricity. But the driver being a moron isn't the car's fault.

 

I'm truly perplexed by people who are so vehemently against electric cars that they'll grasp any straw that floats past to demonstrate how they're a bad idea, as if the world is going to say, "Gosh, you're right. We never thought of that. How stupid we were to think this would work!" You know what? Nobody cares. You're not going to win the argument. It's already happening. You can't stop it. The talking points you get from the TV won't stop it, nor will the guy you vote for. The negatives have been weighed and found to be an acceptable trade-off for many consumers. The shift is coming and it won't be done with legislation--the public will vote with their wallets.

 

And besides, wouldn't you rather that the United States take the lead with this? You guys are shiatting all over Henry Ford for making an automobile because you just don't understand why you should give up your horse. The technology, the assembly plants, the charging systems, the computers, the infrastructure, and the cars/trucks that people want to buy SHOULD BE MADE HERE BY US. Why the HELL would you be against being the heart of an entirely new global industry? Want to return to the glory days when America was the center of the universe? Electric cars is how we will do it, not sitting around trying to figure out how to burn more coal.

 

So go ahead and characterize me as a wacko liberal looney tree hugger if you want. But most of you know me pretty well and you know there's 10W40 in my veins and that I love burning gasoline as much as anyone else. However, I'm also of the opinion that electric cars are a good thing for most of the public, including my wife on her daily commute. Most people simply DON'T CARE what makes the car go as long as they get there in comfort and safety. We aren't the driving public. We aren't the average consumer. We're enthusiasts but I bet we make up less than 5% of the actual motoring world. Everyone else just looks at cars as appliances or fashion accessories or both. Let the public buy electric cars, let them help where they can, what does it hurt? Gasoline will always be available in our lifetimes and nobody will take away your old cars or force you to drive something you don't want.

 

Besides, the laws of supply and demand suggest that the more electric cars there are, the more gas there will be for us and it will get cheaper. Isn't that something you should be happy about? I'd call it a win-win.

 

I now return you to your regularly scheduled tilting at windmills. Thank you for reading.

 

 

[Peter Gariepy]

I've read everyones position on EVs and their arguments against them. We've beaten this subject to death on this forum.

 

Price:  I dont agree with the argument they are too expense. The same could be said for Cadillac or BMW. Tesla Model S's are expensive. But the Model 3 pricing is more in tune with a traditional 4 door sedan.  Here is a more of a real world price comparison:  Ford Maverick Electric truck = $$30,000.  Ford Lightning Electric truck = $50,000. (you can buy both TODAY!) Ford's equivalent gas powered trucks are priced about the same.  I'll agree that the range and convenience or charging it are not as good as gas.  But, if Maverick sales is any indication, people don't seem to be put off by those limitations.

 

Market Viability: Everyone's individual opinions on charging stations, battery life, etc. do not trump the fact that every major car manufacturer in the world is committed to switching to electric. I don't need to do the research on the viability of electric cars, they've done it for me. Multi-billion dollar investments are not done lightly. They have a vested interest in making sure battery life, supplies and recycling is viable.  They have a vested interest in making sure there are adequate charging stations. They have a vested interest is building vehicles people want to buy.

 

Fact:  EV will replace gas powered personal vehicles in the next 20 years, probably sooner.  Even commercial vehicles will convert to EV.  Not all, but a significant portion.  Short haul 18 wheelers, local delivery trucks, etc. are the manufacturer's next target. Gas power is not going away, but its % of the market is going to reduce dramatically in the next few decades.

 

I for one am glad to see it happen.

[46 woodie]

Well, I hope I read this wrong but those so called "Electric Car Charging Pod's" that are being installed everywhere, aren't too environmentally friendly. From what I have read they are rated at 350KW and use 12 gallons of diesel fuel per hour. If it takes 3 hours to  charge a car to get about 200 miles of cruising range that equal's 36 gallons (12 gallons X 3 hours) for the 200 miles. Is this correct?

[Peter Gariepy]

3 minutes ago, 46 woodie said:

Well, I hope I read this wrong but those so called "Electric Car Charging Pod's" that are being installed everywhere, aren't too environmentally friendly. From what I have read they are rated at 350KW and use 12 gallons of diesel fuel per hour. If it takes 3 hours to  charge a car to get about 200 miles of cruising range that equal's 36 gallons (12 gallons X 3 hours) for the 200 miles. Is this correct?

No.

[TerryB]

2 minutes ago, 46 woodie said:

Well, I hope I read this wrong but those so called "Electric Car Charging Pod's" that are being installed everywhere, aren't too environmentally friendly. From what I have read they are rated at 350KW and use 12 gallons of diesel fuel per hour. If it takes 3 hours to  charge a car to get about 200 miles of cruising range that equal's 36 gallons (12 gallons X 3 hours) for the 200 miles. Is this correct?

I have never seen one, where are they located?  The charging stations I see around me are all electric powered.  To say they are everywhere is a stretch.

[John348]

13 minutes ago, Fossil said:

No your not and at first glance they look to be a very viable option. Is a Hydrogen powered vehicle more environmentally friendly to build than building an EV? Also what are the impacts of producing the fuel?

If I lived in town and most if not all of my driving was short trips then I'd consider an EV. Rural ownership just doesn't ad up yet. Especially in the cold. 

Are there any charging stations in national parks yet? 

 

 

A close relative works for the NPS and yes there are charging stations in the parks for the NPS vehicles because their fleet has been changing over for the past three years to EV's. There are also provisions installed already at for charging stations at many of the parks waiting on contracts with outside vendors (the providers) to be finalized. So the underground work has been completed in the off season   

[ply33]

7 minutes ago, Matt Harwood said:

. . . Sure, driving through Death Valley would be a mistake . . .

Well written on almost all points. However I will take issue with this one point. There are level 2 EV charging stations in Death Valley in at least the Furnace Creek area (at both the Inn At Death Valley and at the Furnace Creek Ranch). Even without those in a longer range recent model EV it would be possible, though perhaps “range anxiety” inducing, to charge outside the park at someplace like Baker and make a round trip into and out of the park.

 

12 minutes ago, Fossil said:

Are there any charging stations in national parks yet? 

Yes. And apparently there is a push by the NPS to get charging stations into most of the bigger parks.'

 

6 minutes ago, 46 woodie said:

Well, I hope I read this wrong but those so called "Electric Car Charging Pod's" that are being installed everywhere, aren't too environmentally friendly. From what I have read they are rated at 350KW and use 12 gallons of diesel fuel per hour. If it takes 3 hours to  charge a car to get about 200 miles of cruising range that equal's 36 gallons (12 gallons X 3 hours) for the 200 miles. Is this correct?

Peter gave you a simple "no". I will go into a bit more detail.

 

The faster charging new EVs can go from 10% to 80% charge in less than 20 minutes at a 350kW DC fast charger and that would give at least 200 miles of range. It won’t take 3 hours, only 20 minutes. Also, the only diesel powered charging equipment I have heard of is for mobile applications (roadside service). For any fixed location if they cannot tap into utility power they are using solar panels to charge the location’s batteries. Then the charger’s batteries are used to fast charge the car.

[TerryB]

So this guy buys a 1929 Zipmobile for $25k and then spends another $25k to make it look good. So now with his $50k Zipmobile he figures it would be fun to go to the Zipmobile Nationals in Walla Walla WA but he lives in PA and his Zipmobile will only travel at 45-50 miles per hour tops and the wear and tear on it might be too much.  So he decides to buy an enclosed trailer for $20k and a truck to pull it for $40k so he can make the trip safely and in the time he can allot to the adventure.  So now with $110k invested in enjoying his Zipmobile and driving it maybe 200 miles a year on this site he would be considered “normal” and certainly worthy of praise.  
 

But if his neighbor invests $65k in a nice EV to take him on his travels, and that neighbor may have to do some extra planning to complete a long trip, that person is somehow weird and deserving of name calling ridicule for his choice?  If the EV guy likes his vehicle great for him, if the Zipmobile guy enjoys his choice, again great for him.  The idea that a group of so called auto enthusiast find a particular type of vehicle worthy of such distain  as seen here is what worries me the most.  

[John348]

30 minutes ago, 46 woodie said:

Well, I hope I read this wrong but those so called "Electric Car Charging Pod's" that are being installed everywhere, aren't too environmentally friendly. From what I have read they are rated at 350KW and use 12 gallons of diesel fuel per hour. If it takes 3 hours to  charge a car to get about 200 miles of cruising range that equal's 36 gallons (12 gallons X 3 hours) for the 200 miles. Is this correct?

Where did you read that? 

[JACK M]

TerryB, Similar reality.

How about the guy that spends 30-50K on a typical dirt late model race car, Buys a toter for about 150K.

Hauls all over the NW chasing a $1000 win?

I have to admit that those dirt late models are about as much fun you can have with your cloths on as I chased that thousand many times. (mid pack finish might be a few hundred)

But with a $5000 car and a $5000 pick up.

I should have been born in the south where the purses are higher.

[1912Staver]

My only EV beef is the taxpayer subsidy. A big sales motivator in both Canada and the U.S as far as I know. Canada for sure.

Cheapest Canadian market EV is all but triple the price of the cheapest I.C. vehicle. Reasonably priced ? Give me a break.

 

People rich enough to buy a new EV are rich enough to pay their own way in my opinion.

 

 

Edited June 6, 2022 by 1912Staver (see edit history)

[SC38dls]

Matt I will agree with you on most of your points. I also have no problem with someone buying an Electric car if they want. My problem is the infrastructure planning and cost is not being looked at and what is being done is not having a control over what standards of materials  being used except the connections. My brother recently retired from San Diego  power and light as the head of the repair area. He said they have put off so much regular maintenance and only handled emergency repairs for so long the whole system could collapse if a single sub station gets overloaded. They run the generators at 90-100% capacity during normal working hours and had to purchase outside electrical power when demand is too high. Of late they can’t get the outside power so they do the brown outs. If demand increases due to even overnight charging the system is going to need a major overhaul. When he’s talked with other power companies they say the same thing. Our infrastructure needs a major overhaul but no one will commit the dollars necessary. It is eventually going to fall on the consumer. Everyone is going to see a price increase on electric utilities if charging stations are going to be as readily available as gas stations. Even if you don’t own an EV car you will be paying for those improvements. 
I’m sticking to my 38 Studebaker flat 6, heck it’s unique and fun to drive anyhow. if I was still working in a major metro area an EV would be practical but I’m not and happy to be retired. 
dave s 

[Matt Harwood]

1 hour ago, SC38dls said:

Matt I will agree with you on most of your points. I also have no problem with someone buying an Electric car if they want. My problem is the infrastructure planning and cost is not being looked at and what is being done is not having a control over what standards of materials  being used except the connections. My brother recently retired from San Diego  power and light as the head of the repair area. He said they have put off so much regular maintenance and only handled emergency repairs for so long the whole system could collapse if a single sub station gets overloaded. They run the generators at 90-100% capacity during normal working hours and had to purchase outside electrical power when demand is too high. Of late they can’t get the outside power so they do the brown outs. If demand increases due to even overnight charging the system is going to need a major overhaul. When he’s talked with other power companies they say the same thing. Our infrastructure needs a major overhaul but no one will commit the dollars necessary. It is eventually going to fall on the consumer. Everyone is going to see a price increase on electric utilities if charging stations are going to be as readily available as gas stations. Even if you don’t own an EV car you will be paying for those improvements. 
I’m sticking to my 38 Studebaker flat 6, heck it’s unique and fun to drive anyhow. if I was still working in a major metro area an EV would be practical but I’m not and happy to be retired. 
dave s 

 

This won't be a popular opinion, but it's not really the automakers' fault or the market's fault or the cars' fault that some cities have a ton of deferred maintenance in their power grids in an effort to keep rates low. Look at Texas, who gave their customers ridiculously cheap power and heat at the expense of a system that wasn't ready when everyone needed it most. There is no free lunch and I don't have much sympathy for power companies who have been feeding their customers subsidized power in the form of deferred maintenance to keep rates low suddenly having to pay the going rate to get the system up to modern standards. The power companies aren't victims of electric cars--the electric cars are simply going to force them to do all the things they were supposed to do years ago. Oh, those poor, poor power companies! What ever shall they do? Can't have the shareholders not making huge profits, now can we? Let's just cut quality and hope nobody notices and stuff the balance in our pockets!

 

Instead of blaming the electric cars for the problems, why not put the blame where it belongs? The [insanely profitable] power companies.

 

The other upside of a modern power grid is that the brownouts and blackouts that everyone experiences today will be a thing of the past.

 

Americans only care about cheap prices anymore. When cheap reaches the end of the line, as it inevitably does, everyone just wants to find someone/something to blame instead of getting the problem solved. The power companies know this and won't even get a scratch in the fallout--they'll let the electric cars take all the heat for their half-assery, wait for their federal bailout, and Americans will be happy to go along with it as long as they can gleefully blame the electric cars and their owners. Everyone loves a scapegoat!

 

 

Edited June 6, 2022 by Matt Harwood (see edit history)

[SC38dls]

You’re right about the power companies deferred maintenance, it’s one of the reasons my brother retired. 
The customers are going to pay for it at sometime EV car or not. 
dave s 

[TAKerry]

On the lighter side....... in response to people not knowing where electric comes from,  a few years ago my company was tasked with installing security cameras inside a retail store to prevent theft from primarily the employees. We met with the security guy that had about a dozen cameras to put in. We placed them around the store in various locations that were obvious. The coax cable that came off of the camera was attached to a blank wall plate, which in turn was screw directly to the drywall. Nothing was hooked up and the red blinking light on the dummy camera was powered by a 9v battery. The people working there were clueless. The security guy said that the thefts went way down when these were installed in their other stores.

[Bhigdog]

1 hour ago, Matt Harwood said:

Oh, those poor, poor power companies! What ever shall they do? Can't have the shareholders not making huge profits, now can we?

Utility stocks were always seen as "widows and orphans" stocks because they paid

MODEST but dependable dividends, year in and year out.

Rates are usually set by a Utility Commission.The utility commission is generally made up of appointees, and not elected people. With out getting into or using the "P" word, or special interests,  the story is FAR more complicated than can be explained by simple knee jerk bashing of one entity or another.

It's simplistic to think other wise.

As always: Follow the money. Follow the money..................Bob

 

 

[Terry Harper]

5 hours ago, Matt Harwood said:

However, you will see a growing shift towards electric trucks doing local work and sooner or later...

I am actually somewhat surprised that this isn't leading the charge (no pun intended) Especially short haul, local work or even construction work - both of which are by far the most inefficient application of a diesel engine. (i.e. dramatically varying loads, speeds, & operating temps.) compared to long haul work.

[Peter Gariepy]

5 hours ago, 46 woodie said:

Well, I hope I read this wrong but those so called "Electric Car Charging Pod's" that are being installed everywhere, aren't too environmentally friendly. From what I have read they are rated at 350KW and use 12 gallons of diesel fuel per hour. If it takes 3 hours to  charge a car to get about 200 miles of cruising range that equal's 36 gallons (12 gallons X 3 hours) for the 200 miles. Is this correct?

https://www.verifythis.com/article/news/verify/money-verify/no-gas-vehicles-not-cheaper-than-electric-to-drive/536-7c3971c1-fd77-4c1f-96bd-8f3e27b39028

 

"So we can VERIFY it’s not cheaper to drive one mile in a gas-powered car than an electric vehicle. It costs about 17 cents to drive one mile in an average gas-powered vehicle versus roughly 5 cents to drive one mile in an electric vehicle."

 

So gas costs 3x more than electric according to thus article.

[kar3516]

Honestly I thought the cross country journey story was extremely insightful as to the challenges of cross country EV travel.  I know that it’s going to get way better for EVs headed cross country in the future.  I know they won’t be for everyone everywhere.  I think Matt Harwood summarizes it all about right.  And I also know that my current driving habits aren’t compatible with an electric vehicle.  But I was hoping a few might chime in with their EV cross country trip experiences...

 

[Bhigdog]

10 minutes ago, Peter Gariepy said:

"So we can VERIFY it’s not cheaper to drive one mile in a gas-powered car than an electric vehicle. It costs about 17 cents to drive one mile in an average gas-powered vehicle versus roughly 5 cents to drive one mile in an electric vehicle."

 

Simplistic in the extreme.

Factor in amortization, time value of money, trade in value, cost of up keep, cost of home charging station cost, time value of waiting to charge, the sure to be rapidly rising power costs, not to mention the "range anxiety" costs in marital bliss. As in:   "You stupid s**t. ....I TOLD you to recharge before we left. Now we're going to be late to the bar mitzvah". The eventual divorce precipitated by the recurring "range fights" will be far more expensive than any Tesla............Bob

[Terry Harper]

6 hours ago, Matt Harwood said:

I'm truly perplexed by people who are so vehemently against electric cars that they'll grasp any straw that floats past to demonstrate how they're a bad idea, as if the world is going to say, "Gosh, you're right. We never thought of that. How stupid we were to think this would work!" You know what? Nobody cares. You're not going to win the argument. It's already happening. You can't stop it.

Matt, I am not "vehemently" opposed to EV's. I feel they have a place. What I am opposed to is the "one solution MUST fit all" approach our government has taken. If people like and find utility and value in an EV that's great. But for many people - whether it's location, cost, local climate conditions etc.  - EV's are not (as the technology stands today) a truly viable solution yet they feel they are being left no alternative but to go that route or go bust trying to afford fuel or eventually be able to purchase a conventional vehicle. People tend to take exception to being forced or coerced either directly or indirectly. Again,let natural market forces drive acceptance and development. 

 

In regards to batteries, as the technology stands now, Lithium EV batteries are very, very energy intensive to recycle. In fact at this point recycling is far more expensive than mining virgin material - thus its currently done at a very limited scale in relation to the product sold.

 

I am glad you enjoy your EV and that it works for you. Just because it works for you by no means implies it will be the best solution for everybody else.

 

At the moment an EV is far from my thoughts as we look forward to how we will afford to heat our home this winter. Up here that is a life or death matter and I am very afraid for those, such as our elderly, living on fixed or limited incomes but I guess that is of no importance as a consequence.

 

Edited June 6, 2022 by Terry Harper (see edit history)

[Peter Gariepy]

5 minutes ago, Bhigdog said:

amortization, time value of money, trade in value, cost of up keep, cost of home charging station cost, time value of waiting to charge, the sure to be rapidly rising power costs, not to mention the "range anxiety" costs in marital bliss. As in:   "You stupid s**t. ....I TOLD you to recharge before we left. Now we're going to be late to the bar mitzvah". The eventual divorce precipitated by the recurring "range fights" will be far more expensive than any Tesla

 

ICE vehicles have the following, just like EVs:

• amortization
• time value of money
• trade in value
• cost of up keep
• "You stupid s**t. ... I TOLD you to fill the tank before we left...."

As to your comment "time value of waiting to charge". Definitely a cost. But, for those with home charger:  Get home, plug it in, no time wasted. Alternatively get a 80% charge in a Tesla in 20min at a charging station. Takes time to fill up a gas tank too.  Not as much as a EV charge but still a time cost.

 

As to your comment "The eventual divorce...".  I don't think I'd got to far out on a limb by saying that "you bought another old car!?" precipitates more divorces than "range fights". 😇

[Matt Harwood]

5 minutes ago, Terry Harper said:

What I am opposed to is the "one solution MUST fit all" approach our government has taken.

Can you cite the law that says all people must buy an electric vehicle? Or the one that says you can't drive a gasoline vehicle anymore? Or the one that says you're not allowed to build gasoline vehicles after a certain date? I'm coming up dry. Sorry.

 

7 minutes ago, Terry Harper said:

In regards to batteries, as the technology stands now, Lithium EV batteries are very, very energy intensive to recycle. In fact at this point recycling is far more expensive than mining virgin material - thus its currently done at a very limited scale in relation to the product sold.

 

It was also financially worthwhile to pull oil out of the tar sands until it wasn't (although it soon will be again). Demand will grow and technology will change to make recycling far more viable. And I can still guarantee nobody's throwing electric car batteries in a ditch, regardless of the cost of recycling. The disposal/pollution argument just doesn't fly at any price.

 

9 minutes ago, Terry Harper said:

I am glad you enjoy your EV and that it works for you. Just because it works for you by no means implies it will be the best solution for everybody else.

 

Did I say that there is one best solution for everyone and that it's an electric car? Did I get even remotely evangelical about electric cars? I don't think so and I really tried not to because I'm not a zealot, just someone who chose an EV the way other people choose between a convertible or a sedan--it fit our needs, not because I believe I'm saving the world. What I'm pretty sure I did say was that the electric cars are coming due to market forces not legislation, that many of the reasons for their rejection are often baldly transparent or even irrational, and that you will always be able to buy gasoline and burn as much of it as you want in an automobile, which I'm in favor of. I don't think I even implied that electric cars were the one correct solution for everyone and that there oughta be a law. In fact, one of my points specifically acknowledges that they're NOT for everyone or every circumstance and probably never will be. But I am confident that they'll get better, more popular, and more convenient, and that's only good news for those of us who like to burn gasoline--there will be more of it for us. Enthusiasts should be embracing electric cars if only for this reason.

 

Nevertheless, things change. It's the nature of the universe.

[RAH]

With all due respect to Gunsmoke and others, I concur with moderator that this subject has been talked to death with NO obvious real conclusion. However, think about this for a moment. This blue ball we call home has over time had MANY climate changes over centuries some catastrophic and others not so much but all those have happened LONG before ICE engines or EVs with their coal fired power plants came to pass. I believe the real problem here is the obsessive litigious mindset that things cannot simply happen without something OR someone to blame for it!! Think hard and Logical before jumping off that fence Ya'll are balancing on one side or the other. Things CAN simply happen. The important thing is how we as a community deal with it! There are still people building fancy homes on river banks or cliffs for the view Damn the floods or landslides! Fact, EVs and their battery fuel tanks are NOT Green! Their power still needs to be created external to the vehicle and their battery with heavy metals still need to be dug out of the ground as long as those metals still exist. The bottom line is about POWER to move things OR control others. Some people make things happen, others watch things happen and still others wake up and say "What just happened?" Climate change is and will continue to happen. The important thing is how the corporate WE adjust and deal with it! 

[1912Staver]

Perhaps not in the U.S.A. But several countries including Canada have put into law " No more I.C. vehicle sales " after a certain year. Currently 2035 in Canada . Other countries with similar legislation have different targets. I know, there are only 35 Million of us Beavers up here in the Northland. Similar " save the planet " laws could be headed your way , sooner than later in some cases.

[1912Staver]

The corporate WE will adjust the same way as it always has, whatever makes them the most money this quarter.

[RAH]

1912 Staver, Yes it IS about POWER and likely always will be! LOL

[3macboys]

The one forgotten item in all of this is the road - who is going to pay for it?  If I'm driving an ICE vehicle I'm paying taxes for that infrastructure (and we know it's not enough to repair what needs to be fixed already), but EV's thus far are not.  At some point there is going to be another day of reckoning on that issue as well.  I do believe that there is a place for EV's but until this issue is resolved any cost/benefit analysis between the two really is a non-starter.

[Matt Harwood]

Just now, 3macboys said:

The one forgotten item in all of this is the road - who is going to pay for it?  If I'm driving an ICE vehicle I'm paying taxes for that infrastructure (and we know it's not enough to repair what needs to be fixed already), but EV's thus far are not.  At some point there is going to be another day of reckoning on that issue as well.  I do believe that there is a place for EV's but until this issue is resolved any cost/benefit analysis between the two really is a non-starter.

 

I pay an extra $250/year to register my electric car in Ohio, a fee specifically designed to replace the gas tax money that I'm not paying .

 

Ohio, being a stupid place, can't be the only state to have thought of this solution and it is unlikely that gas drivers will be subsidizing the electric cars. That $250/year is about 660 gallons of fuel at $0.38 tax per gallon. 660 gallons at, say, 25 MPG is about 16,500 miles/year. We drive our electric car about 9000 miles a year, so I am technically subsidizing the gas drivers at this point simply because I'm paying all at once, not as I use it like with the gas tax. I'm not complaining, I'm OK with that system. I don't mind paying my fair share and even a little extra.

[Bhigdog]

29 minutes ago, Peter Gariepy said:

As to your comment "The eventual divorce...".  I don't think I'd got to far out on a limb by saying that "you bought another old car!?" precipitates more divorces than "range fights". 😇

Good point. Be pretty difficult to quantify that data point. But still, I did enjoy writing my marital bliss remark.........Bob

[Bhigdog]

1 minute ago, Matt Harwood said:

 

I pay an extra $250/year to register my electric car in Ohio, a fee specifically designed to replace the gas tax money that I'm not paying .

Excellent! And I'm sure EVERY dime of your $250 is going to road repair....😁..........Bob

[Matt Harwood]

Just now, Bhigdog said:

Excellent! And I'm sure EVERY dime of your $250 is going to road repair....😁..........Bob

 

Not my problem. I'm paying more than my fair share, they're collecting it in lieu of gas taxes. Where it goes isn't something I can control. My conscience is clean--I'm not getting something for nothing.

[3macboys]

2 minutes ago, Matt Harwood said:

 

I pay an extra $250/year to register my electric car in Ohio, a fee specifically designed to replace the gas tax money that I'm not paying .

 

Ohio, being a stupid place, can't be the only state to have thought of this solution and it is unlikely that gas drivers will be subsidizing the electric cars. That $250/year is about 660 gallons of fuel at $0.38 tax per gallon. 660 gallons at, say, 25 MPG is about 16,500 miles/year. We drive our electric car about 9000 miles a year, so I am technically subsidizing the gas drivers at this point simply because I'm paying all at once, not as I use it like with the gas tax. I'm not complaining, I'm OK with that system. I don't mind paying my fair share and even a little extra.

Thanks Matt - that's the first time that I've heard of any state/province attempting to put a solution in place.  I have been waiting to see just how exactly they were going to deal with this.  With those numbers it's no wonder we are so far behind in bridge repairs etc, I would have thought that we were paying more over the course of a year.

[Terry Harper]

12 minutes ago, Matt Harwood said:

Can you cite the law that says all people must buy an electric vehicle? Or the one that says you can't drive a gasoline vehicle anymore? Or the one that says you're not allowed to build gasoline vehicles after a certain date? I'm coming up dry. Sorry.

Matt,

Deep breath..... I agree there is no law and never implied one. However there is very real policy. Add to that legacy manufacturers stating that they will end conventional vehicle production by this year or that and state initiatives (The ban recently proposed by California for instance) and you have significant forces working to force an expanded EV market. 

 

Quote

It was also financially worthwhile to pull oil out of the tar sands until it wasn't (although it soon will be again). Demand will grow and technology will change to make recycling far more viable. And I can still guarantee nobody's throwing electric car batteries in a ditch, regardless of the cost of recycling. The disposal/pollution argument just doesn't fly at any price.

Yes, technically I agree. However, it took over 100 years for market conditions to exist that make the Tar Sand process financially viable. I am not saying that it will take a 100 years of batteries stacking up before recycling becomes viable - at least I hope it wouldn't take that long but who knows. How long is too long? 

 

Quote

What I'm pretty sure I did say was that the electric cars are coming due to market forces not legislation,

We will have to agree to disagree on this one. As I mentioned previously, other than proposed legislation in California and maybe other states I am unaware of you are correct... to a degree. There are many indirect methods and avenues to shape acceptance and compliance outside of legislation.

 

Matt, again I am glad your EV works for you. Coming from an engineering and technology background I find it fascinating technology. I too wish success to the industry -  but on its own merit driven by true market forces not coerced.

[Bhigdog]

Actually, you're getting away cheap, Matt. Road fuel tax here in PA is $.576/gal for gasoline and $.741/gal for road use diesel............Oy Vey!..........Bob

[Avanti Bill]

There are many issues to be solved and I am sure most will be in one form or another.  The point I was making and stand behind is that there can be deadlines imposed and subsidies implemented but that won't get the infrastructure built.  Without massive infrastructure investment and probably at least 50 years of serious work you will not be able to travel about this country easily in a pure EV.  A hybrid can, for sure, today and I think they make the most sense as they can transition us until a technological leap in battery or power source can take hold.  Just because a bunch of dim witted politicians and bureaucrats mandate something doesn't make it happen.  

[Terry Harper]

Maine is currently $.30/gal gas and $.31/gal. diesel. They are struggling to develop a road use tax system for EV's. Lots of public funded incentives though.

[JV Puleo]

My daily driver, a 1989 Blazer S-10, cost me $3500. That is the MOST I have ever spent for an everyday car and it is probably about the extent of my budget. Nevertheless, I am taxed to provide a subsidy to people who have far more than I do so they can buy an electric car that, at the very least, costs half of what I paid for my house and many cost more. You can't imagine how much I resent that... I have never envied someone who more successful than I am but the notion that I have some obligation to underwrite their far more lavish lifestyle harks back to the French ancient regime.

[alsancle]

2 minutes ago, JV Puleo said:

My daily driver, a 1989 Blazer S-10, cost me $3500. That is the MOST I have ever spent for an everyday car and it is probably about the extent of my budget. Nevertheless, I am taxed to provide a subsidy to people who have far more than I do so they can buy an electric car that, at the very least, costs half of what I paid for my house and many cost more. You can't imagine how much I resent that... I have never envied someone who more successful than I am but the notion that I have some obligation to underwrite their far more lavish lifestyle harks back to the French ancient regime.

 

Joe,  this is a great point.  I said this about the Tesla,  but electric cars are for the more well off.   High gas prices hurt people on a budget much more than wealthy people.