Why aren't battery power vehicles cheaper?

Quote: rxwine

They can be recycled.

Yes, so can car tires: still a problem.

Quote: missedhervee

Yes, so can car tires: still a problem.

I figured you wanted to know if EV s a bigger problem, not if it's a problem.

Here's the EPA site I got the information from.

https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/electric-vehicle-myths

For what it's worth. According to the government EVs are more efficient than gasoline engine cars.

“EVs convert over 77 per cent of the electrical energy from the grid to power at the wheels. Conventional gasoline vehicles only convert about 12 per cent – 30 per cent of the energy stored in gasoline to power at the wheels,” according to the US Department of Energy

"Electric vehicles (EVs) are more efficient than their gasoline-powered counterparts. An EV electric drive system is only responsible for a 15% to 20% energy loss compared to 64% to 75% for a gasoline engine."

They will benefit the utility companies. During off peak hours, utilities may have to take a turbine off line, and they may burn more fuel than necessary to keep the remaining turbines on line. In addition to doubling average household demand for electricity, millions of EVs charging during off peak hours will increase profits for the utilities.

Great for utility investors, unless the dems nationalize the industry.

Power to the people: Bernie calls for federal takeover of electricity production

Quote: Tanko

Power to the people: Bernie calls for federal takeover of electricity production

When I was in Vegas, seemed to be only one power company. Where I live only seems to be one power company. I don't see a lot of competition going on as it is. I'm not even sure that it wouldn't be an improvement.

Quote: Tanko

Power to the people: Bernie calls for federal takeover of electricity production

What Bernie calls for is meaningless
He's just 1 vote
Regardless, I can see Texans supporting this :-)

Quote: missedhervee

Does anyone know whether EV's will in fact prevent a lot of fossil fuels from burning or nuclear materials from being created?
I ask because most power is from dirty sources.

The avg vehicle in US gets 25.3 mpg or 3.946 gallons per 100 miles. At 19.37 pounds of carbon dioxide per gallon that is 76.4 lbs carbon dioxide per 100 miles
A Ford F-150 lightning (as an extreme example) requires 49 kWh per 100 miles of driving. The average electricity generation in US produces 0.85 pounds of carbon dioxide per kWh. So the F-150 lightning electricity generates 41.65 lbs of carbon dioxide per 100 miles of driving an F-150.

So the Ford F-150 lightning generates 41.65 lbs of carbon dioxide vs 76.4 lbs of carbon dioxide of the average gasoline vehicle per 100 miles.

A Chevy Bolt requires 28 kWh per 100 miles of driving, or a little more than half the electricity of a Ford F-150 lightning. So the Chevy Bolt generates 23.8 lbs of carbon dioxide vs 76.4 lbs of carbon dioxide of the average gasoline vehicle per 100 miles.

Now the most efficient non plug in hybrid sold in America, a Hyundai Ioniq Blue gets ~ 60 mpg so it only generated 32.3 lbs of carbon dioxide per 100 miles of driving. Still not as low as the Chevy Bolt, but without the pain of plugging in if you don't have a garage or the time and expense of using public recharging units.


-----------------------
Moving off of average
-----------------------
West Virginia electricity production generates 1.92 lbs of carbon dioxide per kWh, far more than the national average of 0.85 pounds of carbon dioxide per kWh. Hawaii generates 1.55 lbs of carbon dioxide per kWh, and it is far worse on Oahu.


The two states that are the most popular for EV sales (relative to population) are California and Hawaii.

California produces very low carbon dioxide from their electrical generation for two reasons (1) they generate 1/3 of electricity by renewables, and (2) California generates very little electricity per capita (roughly 40% of the national average). Because of both these reasons they are very vulnerable to rolling blackouts in summer around dinner time during heat waves. As a result SOCAL edison charges as much as 65 cents per kWh between 5pm and 8pm during the four months of June through September. That is over 500% of what we pay in Pennsylvania, where electricity comes from nuclear, coal and natural gas.

Honolulu has the highest carbon dioxide emission rate of an urban area in the US. Given their geography coal and natural gas plants have been nearly impossible, they never built a nuclear plant, so they are forced to use ultra expensive petroleum.

So EVs will make a huge difference in California and much less in Hawaii. Of course , the outcome will be mostly a theoretical advantage as the problem will be production. California produces ~400 kWh per person per month in-state and a Volkswagen ID.4 needs ~400kWh per month to run for 15,000 miles per year. Nationwide we produce ~1000 kWh per person per month.

Arizona (a battleground state) and Utah (a firmly Republican state) are the red or redish states where EVs are the most popular.

So the answer to your question is that EVs will make a difference in general, mostly because the states with the least penetration of EVs
Kentucky
Alabama
Wyoming
South Dakota
Arkansas
Louisiana
West Virginia
North Dakota
Mississippi
are among the states with the dirtiest electric generation.

I have suggested that Alabama, by virtues of massive relatively clean electrical generation capability primarily from natural gas and nuclear energy consider being the first Republican state to encourage EV purchases with tax incentives. They have so much generation capability that foreign automobile manufacturers are building factories in Alabama lured by the promise of plentiful cheap electricity. The state might further incentivise production if the population invests in EVs.

Quote: Pacomartin

I have suggested that Alabama, by virtues of massive relatively clean electrical generation capability primarily from natural gas and nuclear energy consider being the first Republican state to encourage EV purchases with tax incentives. They have so much generation capability that foreign automobile manufacturers are building factories in Alabama lured by the promise of plentiful cheap electricity. The state might further incentivise production if the population invests in EVs.

The state shouldn't incentivise any production through rebates or tax concessions for locating factories in their state. If EV's make sense then the free market will support them, if not they fail.

Government incentives just screw up the market. We now have the situation where the leader in EV's Tesla who is largely responsible for the success of EV's now is no longer eligible for rebates because of their production. The other producers who sat back now get a subsidy to compete in the market created by Tesla. In what universe does this make sense.

news blurb

seven of the biggest Bitcoin mining companies are now using nearly as much electricity as all the homes in Houston combined, meaning that all crypto mining in the country is almost certainly already using much more.

Quote: kenarman

Government incentives just screw up the market. .

That depends. Private companies let China become overly dominant in the microchip market.