I haven’t researched the numbers. But how is your electric bill in comparison to pre EV?
Huge jump or not really?
Anyone own an EV?
- Thread starter littleitch1
- Start date
I haven’t researched the numbers. But how is your electric bill in comparison to pre EV?
Huge jump or not really?
I get about 210 real world mi on 75 kw.
My wife is also EV and gets the same on 50 kw. She has a single motor Model 3. No where near as fun but insanely efficient.
So average is 3.4 mi/kw.
With 2 assumptions, that you drive 15000 miles a year, and that a kw is 15¢, then here is the result per month:
15,000 / 3.4 / 12 = 368 kw
368 x .15 = $55 per month per car.
My wife is also EV and gets the same on 50 kw. She has a single motor Model 3. No where near as fun but insanely efficient.
So average is 3.4 mi/kw.
With 2 assumptions, that you drive 15000 miles a year, and that a kw is 15¢, then here is the result per month:
15,000 / 3.4 / 12 = 368 kw
368 x .15 = $55 per month per car.
You are in favor of how the gas you burn gets to the pump?
Pollution is a wash?
Wow. Just wow.
Don’t give a shitters win the prize today.
Tell your grandkids it was fun.
It is telling that not a single carbon fuel person addresses the impacts of said usage. It seems ingrained and accepted.
Those same peeps have been trained to focus on the negatives about battery production. They fall in line.
Don’t give a shitters win the prize today.
Tell your grandkids it was fun.
It is telling that not a single carbon fuel person addresses the impacts of said usage. It seems ingrained and accepted.
Those same peeps have been trained to focus on the negatives about battery production. They fall in line.
Last edited:
@billanole - Talk miles please. $55/month for approx. how many miles. Wild guess accepted…
I stated 15,000 miles a year is the assumption. So 15000/12 is 1,250.
So $55/mo for 1,250 miles is your answer. (assuming $0.15 cost per kw which I think is conservative)
I stated 15,000 miles a year is the assumption. So 15000/12 is 1,250.
So $55/mo for 1,250 miles is your answer. (assuming $0.15 cost per kw which I think is conservative)
Last edited:
You are ok with the nastiness of the carbon energy world? It kills many due to cancer in Louisiana, is causing coastal communities to move, pollutes water in places that frack, gets cleaned up on the public dole at super fund sites, contributes to lung cancer and asthma, etc…
God Bless America!
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
First Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Has Congress passed something restricting your speech? When did that happen?
The production of batteries and electricity has its downsides as well. In addition, the added burden on the electrical grid which is already strained and the issues regarding disposal of these clean car batteries. Its a wash for now.
I didn't say I was ok with any pollution. What I said was that I don't see one side outweighing the other if you include all factors. The pollution issue to me is a wash when you consider the impacts of oil production vs the production of the batteries and their disposal.
Do you have numbers on cancer deaths due to carbon energy? Lets compare those to cancer deaths due to smoking or other causes and see how they compare. Is there direct correlation between oil production sites and communities with high cancer rates? How do those compare with those rates around coal burning sites or nuclear plants even chemical production facilities.
That's because were all dumb uneducated rednecks. We are only taught to parrot the company line. We tell you the benefits of ICE vehicles while ignoring the negatives of their production, use and disposal. We then ignore the fact that there could be negative impacts to producing the energy to operate them.
I notice while lecturing us dummies on the environment you haven't stated what model EV you drive and when you disposed of your nasty climate killing ICE vehicle.
Anyone notice how Cuba is still driving ICE vehicles built in the 50's? Amazing how they still run good. Wonder what the shelf life of a EV will be?
They say a EV battery will last 10-20 years so lets say that number is 15. The average cost of a EV battery is (Tesla) is between 12 and 20k lets say its 16k. Would you spend 16k on a battery for a 15 year old Tesla?
I just saw an article in the WSJ today about who controls the majority of mining and thus the supply of nickel used for EV batteries…
China.
I’m happy that the alternative sources for energy continue to be developed but the technology is still evolving. Until it’s further down the road the sources we’ve relied on up to this point have to stay in the mix.
China.
I’m happy that the alternative sources for energy continue to be developed but the technology is still evolving. Until it’s further down the road the sources we’ve relied on up to this point have to stay in the mix.
non sequitur question? 4th of July forgotten already?
I'm the one who followed a post about using the proper references with one containing the verbiage of the 1st Amendment? I'm not the one implying that my rights have been violated somehow.
Or are you just going to list the Amendments one by one each day?
I think there was some sarcasm involved in a few of these posts. Ill make sure to use the right font next time.
nope
Problem lies with the Executive branch and unelected bureaucrats not Congress ignoring the 1st amendment. That being said time restraints do seem to be a problem with congress in both the Senate and House.
Accountability seems to be a real problem today in DC. Not trying to be political with this post.
Every action in Science has a counterpoint. There is no such thing as "Settled Science". Stifling either is wrong. EV'S have downsides concerning the environment? That is my only point. Why so confrontational?
Who's being confrontational? You post stuff out of the blue. Stuff that has zero to do with the subject at hand and when I ask a question I'm being confrontational? Sensitive much?
This is not a rhetorical post, those with a science/engineering background please weigh in...
1). Most, if not all our power plants (excluding nuclear) are run by fossil fuels, coal being one of those fuels (last I checked the largest fossil fuel used in power plants)
2). Say we convert to all battery vehicles by 2030? That would then increase the amount of energy needed to be produced at power plants using fossil fuels, thereby increasing or maintaining the use of fossil fuels. What have we really gained and if there is a "gain", how significant is it?
This, along with a few other aspects, makes me a skeptic on the battery vehicles...
1). Most, if not all our power plants (excluding nuclear) are run by fossil fuels, coal being one of those fuels (last I checked the largest fossil fuel used in power plants)
2). Say we convert to all battery vehicles by 2030? That would then increase the amount of energy needed to be produced at power plants using fossil fuels, thereby increasing or maintaining the use of fossil fuels. What have we really gained and if there is a "gain", how significant is it?
This, along with a few other aspects, makes me a skeptic on the battery vehicles...
The conversion of fuel into energy is far more efficient in a power plant. ICE is very inefficient. So far less fuel to do the same job.
Also, the waste product in a power plant is more manageable than in the ICE in each car. So less pollution makes it to our atmosphere.
Thanks. If possible, could you give me some numbers/measurement of some sort in terms of efficiency and pollution output?
No. You wanted to play the victim while taking a shot at me with this post. I told you to not be afraid.
Your missing a few important factors. The fuel EV's use has to be produced and stored. That storage is a battery that must be produced through mining and manufacturing then disposed of. This creates pollution as well. I dont think its as one sided as people think. While EV's are cleaner and more efficient as the numbers of each type equal the overall footprint will start to level I think. Data would be a good to have just on the power plant and electrical grid aspects.
It’s about 4x more efficient.
https://electrek.co/2021/07/27/ev-vs-ice-how-far-can-you-travel-in-each-state-for-100/
In this article, in Florida, for $100, you can travel 1,009.2 miles on gas, or 3,846.2 miles on electric power.
So 3.811x
That is about right based upon my experience with our two EVs.
They run on peanuts compared to a gas car.
As for pollution output, it’s 3.811x better due to efficiency BEFORE factoring in the efficiencies of a power plant scrubbing for carbon output etc. So, much, much cleaner.
Picture it like the switch from incandescent light bulbs to fluorescent. Fluorescent is about 5x more efficient.
Reactions from traditionalists are similar in some ways too. It wasn’t that long ago that incandescent fans were enraged that they couldn’t find their bulbs on shelves and big brother this and woke that.
But just a short time later, today, everyone would look at you like you’re a moron if you’re buying an incandescent light bulb.
Reactions from traditionalists are similar in some ways too. It wasn’t that long ago that incandescent fans were enraged that they couldn’t find their bulbs on shelves and big brother this and woke that.
But just a short time later, today, everyone would look at you like you’re a moron if you’re buying an incandescent light bulb.
The bulb switch was all about saving electricity. I forget the year but a law was passed stating 30% reduction in energy use by 2030. This started the SEER rating of appliances and the push from standard bulbs to CFL and eventually LED. A comparable LED bulb used 10watts of power compared to a 60 watt standard bulb.
The push to EV's is different in that its increasing electric use and reducing oil production and carbon emissions.
This switch wont be the same as the auto industry and oil companies have bigger teeth. Plus there's issues with other types of pollution and increased electricity demand on an already strained grid.
It will be interesting to see it play out. For now ill stick with my ICE car. If I had to commute again I would reconsider though.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
FSU 90 Syracuse 74 The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly
- Latest: Bill From Tampa
-
FSU women's basketball plays host to Syracuse (Sunday at 2 p.m.)- Latest: Bob Ferrante
-
