Charging Costs (on the road)

[JSeis]

I commute just 90 miles a day and charge at home nightly at $.0634/KWh. My annual savings net v. $5 gas is about $4,000. That’s where EV’s shine. I’m typically at 118 mpge and that’s in the range of my old Honda 50.

Sponsored

 

[HeyMomTheMeatloaf]

You bring up a few good points. Also keep in mind; in these rates - none of the revenue goes to fund roads. So states are still looking at ways to get EV drivers to pay for road usage like ICE cars do with gasoline taxes.

In defense of EV charging rates; these stations have huge initial investments. Out of Spec Motoring quotes in a video today that a bank of 8 Tesla v3 superchargers could easily have a total - installed - price tag over $1mn. DCFC are seriously expensive. Like $50-100k for the unit themselves, and if electric needs to be ran or upgraded - it adds up really quick. The power needs are massive and the purchase agreements with utilities may not even be have that attractive of rates considering the unique (massive, bursty) needs of DCFC. It's one thing to charge a few EV in a neighborhood on L2 at 3AM; it's another thing to have 8 Hummer EV show up to a bank of DCFC at 3PM on a peak-hot summer day.

Rates themselves are another topic. Tesla chargers are 36c/kWh. Most EA stations I've seen are 43c/kWh. But stations that charge per minute are particularly painful, and variable in their absurdly high costs.

Beyond the rates; DCFC do not yet operate like gas stations do with respect to additional purchases made in a store (tobacco products, soft drinks, candy, snacks). DCFC are often their own thing, oddly placed at times. They stuff them in the corner on existing surface lots like grocery stores. This creates its own problem.

Women in particular have commented how the EV charging experience when alone is often an uncomfortable experience. This isn't hard to imagine after you've visited a handful of Tesla Superchargers and other DCFC. They are not exactly guaranteed to be well lit, or in areas that don't leave you feeling exposed and generally unsafe. There is no gas station attendant. There isn't a constant flow of traffic.

The point remains; if you rely on DCFC for your charging needs, the costs will rival purchasing gasoline. If you drive especially inefficient EV (think Rivian, or....Hummer EV, or any other EV that is coming out with significantly higher energy usage), you will feel it even more. Those things might have mediocre range numbers (300...400 mi range), but they accomplish it with absolutely massive 135kWh or larger battery packs. These huge inefficient EV will still have $50-70 DCFC charges when peak/surge rates are in place.

Even at 43c/kWh, which is often 2-3-4x the local residential rate, and the government subsidies; these EV chargers are not exactly profitable business endeavors.

There are also places in USA where peak time of use residential rates are 30-40c/kWh.

I think overtime there will be a lot of legislation put in place - to protect consumers, and to fund roads. IMO, it's only smart to charge at home, or use free L2/L3 chargers (there are a few free DCFC out there). If you have to charge on the road; hotels and their L2 rates are often quite reasonable. But if you need to fill up - DCFC/L3; you are paying a premium because you are using bleeding edge technology. You are paying the way for everyone else to have this in 5-10 years.

Imagine scenarios where a high volume station could charge large battery banks at night during off-peak rates of 1c/kWh (that cheap in parts of the country), and have solar panels + onsite wind generating power, and have negotiated power purchase agreements with the utility providers for discount rates. These stations could be getting 40-50x margin (if you ignore the large initial investments). So yeah - just ignore the 3-4 million initial investment; and the 40-50x margin is extortion.

FInal problem; in the end, how will anyone who isn't a utility company be able to effectively compete in the EV charging market? EVgo, Chargepoint, Electricity America, Blink etc will always be a consumer of electricity from the utility, and at the mercy of the utility company. Some states have utility providers commiting to EV charger installs - which is a welcome thing for EV owners. But people who have invested hundreds of thousands to install DCFC want guarantees that the utility companies aren't going to out-compete by providing lower rates than what they can offer.

Last thought; now is the time to buy stock in utility companies. They are going to be the new oil companies, with growing revenues from the increased electrification of everything.

Not sure if there has been a thread on charging costs?

One of the main benefits of a electric motor over an ICE is they are generally 2-3 times more efficient. That should equate to a 60-70% reduction in energy related running costs; which is true if you charge at home. However many of the fast charging stations are asking ridiculous rates compared to the actual electricity costs in the local market.

For instance here in Florida electricity is generally around 0:10 cents a kWh; at that rate there is a big financial benefits driving an EV over an ICE. Many of the fast charge stations in Florida charge up to 0:43 cents a kWh; at that rate the cost per mile is very similar to an ICE. I feel some of the national charging networks are practically price gouging. A 300-350% mark up over the price of the electricity in the local market is extreme profiteering. Gas stations generally make 5-8% profit per gallon.

This unrestricted profiteering doesn't really effect me personally because we charge using excess solar at home and free chargers my wife's work. But high rates at charging stations are going to impact a lot of people and be a prohibitive factor in the adoption of EVs. This issue need addressing nationally and caps need to be implemented on the mark ups above local electricity costs.

 

[AKgrampy]

Yes, they too are just worried about those poor customers without solar who have to make up for lost revenue so the CEO can buy a new yacht. It's almost like they are trying to kill home solar so they don't lose customers ?.

They better watch it with gutting the net metering regulations; that will push solar customers to get batteries rather than pay through the nose for panels plus offpeak electricity. As of right now the utilities actually have a good deal - they are getting free electricity during peak usage (so they don't have to fire up expensive peaker plants) and can repay those solar customers with cheaper off-peak generated electricity.

You are incorrect. A utilities peak load, M - F, is normally 5 - 9 PM and that is not peak solar. Utilities are basically screwed by net metering. Solar pushed power into system at off peak times and then the consumers draws from the system during peak. The net metering consumer does not pay their full cost for the service they receive and are subsidized by the non net metering companies. That is why in many high solar penetration areas the utilities are raising their customer charge to ensure everyone pays their fair share. Utilities are guaranteed a certain rate of return but are regulated and costs must be justified. They can’t just raise rates and increase profits as they please.

 

[AKgrampy]

FInal problem; in the end, how will anyone who isn't a utility company be able to effectively compete in the EV charging market? EVgo, Chargepoint, Electricity America, Blink etc will always be a consumer of electricity from the utility, and at the mercy of the utility company. Some states have utility providers commiting to EV charger installs - which is a welcome thing for EV owners. But people who have invested hundreds of thousands to install DCFC want guarantees that the utility companies aren't going to out-compete by providing lower rates than what they can offer.
[/QUOTE]

They are not held hostage. They pay the same rates as any other business with the same load characteristics. Essentially they pay the same rate or slightly less than a homeowner. If a utility could get into this business they would most likely not be able to do it any cheaper. The costs are high for two reasons. The first is capital recovery of their investment which is significant. These costs are spread over the KWhs delivered. These costs will come down if the load factor for the charging stations increase. Many people point to the demand charge as a major issue. If the charging unit had a capacity factor above 80% (approximately) the rate overall would be equal to residential. A higher capacity factor would make the prices cheaper. The problem is how many hours out of a day is the charging unit providing service. I am sure units in CA are heavily used but even there how many hours a day are they charging? Here in Fairbanks there are two installed which are almost never used.

 

[mjs020294]

The power companies have the most to gain by getting into the charging space. Third party companies are splitting the revenue with power companies and paying rent to the lot/land owners. Power companies should receive grants to installs charging stations at highway rest stops.

 

[RickMachE]

To reinforce it again, EA rates in states that charge by the kWh are indeed $0.43. Pay $4 a month, and the rate drops to $0.31. Breakeven happens on the first charge, at 34kWh.

In states that charge by the minute. Instead of paying $0.32 per minute, Pass+ members pay $0.24. Breakeven at 50 minutes of charging, i.e. 2nd charge. This works out to around 15 cents per kWh. Very close to most home charging, lower than some.

Sign up for Pass+, then immediately downgrade, which takes effect 30 days later.

 

[Regulus7]

One point nobody has mentioned yet is the usual out of the way locations for most high speed chargers. It’s not just that density of chargers is very low but they are not placed in area for potential optimal usage. I have an ID4 as well and it has 3 years of free EA charging. I have used EA charging twice. It’s just not that convenient to travel to an EA charger and even when driving up to Boston the chargers are like 15-20 mins off the hiway causing detour delays in addition to charging times. The number 1 priority for the new infrastructure bill in building out the charging grid should be to put high speed chargers at every rest area along every major hiway. That would strongly support EV ownership as range anxiety only really manifests itself on long range trips. Ultimately I think that location convenience is more important than cost of electricity at this juncture in the growth of EVs

 

[RickMachE]

One point nobody has mentioned yet is the usual out of the way locations for most high speed chargers. It’s not just that density of chargers is very low but they are not placed in area for potential optimal usage. I have an ID4 as well and it has 3 years of free EA charging. I have used EA charging twice. It’s just not that convenient to travel to an EA charger and even when driving up to Boston the chargers are like 15-20 mins off the hiway causing detour delays in addition to charging times. The number 1 priority for the new infrastructure bill in building out the charging grid should be to put high speed chargers at every rest area along every major hiway. That would strongly support EV ownership as range anxiety only really manifests itself on long range trips. Ultimately I think that location convenience is more important than cost of electricity at this juncture in the growth of EVs

In reality, one's experience with DC charging is very location dependent. We've taken our Mach-E south from Michigan to Florida, to South Carolina, and to Massachusetts. In some areas, i.e. I-75 to Florida, EA chargers are mostly within a mile or so of the highway. In other areas, i.e. east from Ohio to Massachusetts via upstate NY, EA chargers are often in out of the way places. One was located in an outlet mall miles off the highway. One required we drive close to 20 miles roundtrip to get to. In Massachusetts, they were generally older locations. One was in the back of a bank parking lot. Another was in a mall parking lot at a closed Sears store.

Yes, the new locations should be every 50 miles apart, on a highway or right off the highway, which will be much better.

As to free DC charging for years, I think many of the owners of those vehicles are going to find that the constant DC charging (if they don't use level 2 at home or work) is going to seriously degrade their batteries.

 

[HeyMomTheMeatloaf]

Out west, stations are overwhelmed. Out of Spec Motoring was in Las Vegas and recording while queued up for a station.
In the entire city of Las Vegas; there was something like only 3 supercharger spots open (in the entire city). Every other supercharger had either a short wait (less than 15 minutes) or a medium wait (more than 15 minutes).

Kyle remarks that in big western cities, it isn't uncommon to see 5-10 Tesla waiting to charge.

For this reason, I expect the Tesla Supercharger network to remain closed off to 3rd party brands for a long long time. It would only further exacerbate the congestion. And it wouldn't help Tesla out at all - it would only benefit their competitors.

You aren't wrong though; the utilization is a big problem with EV-economics. In areas with lots of wealth (e.g - the coasts), there is too much demand and not enough charging capacity. Whereas the rest of the country, the remaining 95%.....there isn't enough demand to justify more stations.

USA has it's own unique problems with EV affordability, too. US automakers want to sell expensive high margin vehicles. It is great for them, but the result is what we have now. We have EV's that people want; but can't afford. We have semi-affordable EV, but they aren't very sought out (Chevy Bolt, Hyundai Kona). Finally - USA has zero truly affordable EV. Basically, there isn't an EV designed for middle America, and lower-middle incomes. EV remain out of reach for 95% of Americans.

To make up for the lack of demand for DCFC in 95% of the country, there aren't enough vehicles being produced that people want or can afford. For this to change, there simply needs to be a sub-$20k and sub-30k EV that people actually want.

The current crop of EV vehicles are so limiting in their affordability. It doesn't help that (Warning - trigger alert) the only EV manufacturer with any real manufacturing capacity isn't interested in selling vehicles for less than 60k (Tesla). VW, Audi, Ford, Volvo, Porsche, Rivian....bless them all; but with the limited capacity they do have; they are focusing on the $40k+ market. And still, most of these manufacturers are years away from achieving Tesla-levels of production. It is truly a disappointing and discouraging scenario. Rivian R1S...Audi Q4 Etron......these models almost feel old and dated, yet they haven't even made it to customers. Today, if Ford announced a $20k Ford Fusion EV; it would be half a decade before these vehicles even start rolling off an assembly line - and the volume would be similar to what we see in Ford, Audi and Rivian. Extremely limited. How sad is it that non-Tesla owners are basically reliant on DCFC infrastructure from a punitive pity-investment from the dieselgate scandal?

For adoption (and DCFC usage) to seriously increase; USA needs more options at different price points.

It's going to take a lifetime for change to happen with brands pumping out 2k vehicle month, and not focusing on making a sub-30k, sub-20k EV.

At the rate things are going; it's going to be a niche, rich person's toy for quite some time. I know I watch DCFC installs around me, and I've seen zero progress. Lot of DCFC still have "coming soon" labels on Plugshare. They have had them....for months, going on half year, going on year, going on years.....

States like Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, Tennessee, Missouri, Arkansas, Louisiana.......they do a lot of talking, but not a lot of action. And the action they do take? Laughable. Michigan for instance; finite amounts of funding for EV infrastructure. What do they spend ten million bucks on? Not dozens of DCFC, that would make too much sense. Michigan is spending ten million bucks on 1 mile of an in-road charging prototype. Michigan can barely maintain the roads they do have; can't imagine more expensive roads is the solution. Nevermind how the system isn't even guaranteed to be compatible with existing EV's. Nevermind how the system will actually work. Finally, we all see how slow L1 and L2 charging is; and that is wired with a cable. We all know how wireless charging works from a consumer electronics perspective; it's not impressive compared to wired. So....who really expects in-road EV charging to be a solution? At what rate would it be?

THe government and the EV manufacturers (outside of Tesla) are not bringing the right solutions to fix this problem. I worry Tesla is going to continue to pull away with their lead, with their refined ecosystem that they own from end-to-end. Whereas Ford is taking a Microsoft approach; and outsourcing charging infrastructure to third parties. Tesla has spent 10 years building the Supercharger network. All these third parties are practically just entering the market. The Rivian and Ford forums are full of road trip horror stories. Stories that definitely do not reassure people on the sidelines that now is the right time to spend $60-80-100k on an EV.

FInal problem; in the end, how will anyone who isn't a utility company be able to effectively compete in the EV charging market? EVgo, Chargepoint, Electricity America, Blink etc will always be a consumer of electricity from the utility, and at the mercy of the utility company. Some states have utility providers commiting to EV charger installs - which is a welcome thing for EV owners. But people who have invested hundreds of thousands to install DCFC want guarantees that the utility companies aren't going to out-compete by providing lower rates than what they can offer.

They are not held hostage. They pay the same rates as any other business with the same load characteristics. Essentially they pay the same rate or slightly less than a homeowner. If a utility could get into this business they would most likely not be able to do it any cheaper. The costs are high for two reasons. The first is capital recovery of their investment which is significant. These costs are spread over the KWhs delivered. These costs will come down if the load factor for the charging stations increase. Many people point to the demand charge as a major issue. If the charging unit had a capacity factor above 80% (approximately) the rate overall would be equal to residential. A higher capacity factor would make the prices cheaper. The problem is how many hours out of a day is the charging unit providing service. I am sure units in CA are heavily used but even there how many hours a day are they charging? Here in Fairbanks there are two installed which are almost never used.

 

[RickMachE]

Seems like all the overwhelmed stations are Tesla stations.

You might want to do some reading. Tesla has opened their Superchargers overseas in some countries, and will likely open it in the US soon - because they want some of that $7.5B in government money...

Do you own, or have a Mach-E on order? Seems like you own a Tesla.

Another misstatement - Michigan is spending $1.9 million on the test inductive roadway, not $10M. Inductive charging is one of many technologies that are being tested for the future. It would be quite easy to equip cars to accept, but the test is initially focused on commercial vehicles (you may want to do some reading on it if you are interested).

https://www.michigan.gov/whitmer/ne...tric-vehicle-charging-road-system-contract-aw

You seem like you want EVs but you don't want anyone investing unless you agree with what they are investing in?

Also, states are getting EV owners to fund the roads, many have implemented flat registration fees that fund the roads.

Michigan has been at the forefront of autonomous driving testing. Several "Smart Cities" were built including at least 2 near us. In our area, technology has been deployed on roads to collect and transmit data to further advance the technology. We had both our cars equipped with collection boxes some years back in one of the studies. There are over 20 intersections equipped with data collection and transmission technology.

I remember a key finding from the study we participated in was that weather impacted autonomous driving, as did seasonal changes, i.e. leaves falling off trees. Snow had a different impact than rain.

I applaud when government invests in learning what might work in the future, and fully expect failures as well as successes.

 

[Glen Boise]

One point nobody has mentioned yet is the usual out of the way locations for most high speed chargers. It’s not just that density of chargers is very low but they are not placed in area for potential optimal usage. I have an ID4 as well and it has 3 years of free EA charging. I have used EA charging twice. It’s just not that convenient to travel to an EA charger and even when driving up to Boston the chargers are like 15-20 mins off the hiway causing detour delays in addition to charging times. The number 1 priority for the new infrastructure bill in building out the charging grid should be to put high speed chargers at every rest area along every major hiway. That would strongly support EV ownership as range anxiety only really manifests itself on long range trips. Ultimately I think that location convenience is more important than cost of electricity at this juncture in the growth of EVs

No, the DC Fast Chargers should not be in rest areas (except on toll roads, where it costs to leave the road to refuel). Those locations are inconvenient to the other customers of DC Fast Charging. DC Fast Chargers have three groups of customers: Travelers through a community; Visitors to a community (shoppers, business people, and tourists); and people without access to home charging. Locating DC Fast Chargers near interchanges, off the Interstates, would help serve the other groups.
What would help more is encouraging the standard model gas station today, the convenience store selling gasoline, to add selling EV charging to their products. (Assuming their contracts with the big oil companies, providing their gasoline, would allow them to do so. Though I have noticed that BP and Shell gas stations are starting to offer DC Fast Charging, usually with mediocre 50 kw/hr. After all, a gas pump and a charger do the same thing. They refuel cars, using different technologies.) This would avoid sticking the DC Fast Chargers out in some parking lot without access to on-site amenities like signs marking their locations, trash cans, toilets and snack foods. It would help transition gas stations to serve the growing numbers of EVs.
If the states were smart they would not see the infrastructure bill money for DC Fast Charging as highway infrastructure money. Giving the State DOT control of the money would mean we would not see any DC Fast Chargers built for over four years, following normal highway project procedures. Nor, would the charging stations keep up with the rapid changes happening in the DC Fast Charger industry. (Chargers charging at 50 kw/hr are increasingly obsolete. Soon, chargers charging at 150kw/hr will be old tech as more cars start offering charging over 150 kw/hr as the companies offering EVs seek to compete with gasoline cars rapid refueling speeds.) In addition, government agencies would be competing with private enterprise.
Rather, they should see the infrastructure bill money as economic development money. Using the money to incentivize DC Fast Charging companies to accelerate their network expansions into places that need future DC Fast Charging service. (Not just the wealthy communities with larger numbers of EVs today.) It would be a "public/private partnership". The states could identify where service is needed, like every 50 miles along Interstates, plus along other expressways, serving the large population centers not on Interstates or closer than the 50 miles apart. Offer an incentive that if you contract to build, at the identified locations, they will pay up to half of your cost, not to exceed $400,000, after the station is built and in operation. If the companies contract to provide amenities, then increase the maximum to $500,000. This would give an advantage to existing convenience store/gas stations, which all ready provide the amenities and have the room, to add the chargers. It would encourage faster construction of DC Fast Charging stations by companies committed to providing the DC Fast Charging and will be more likely to continue to update their equipment to keep up with new technology.

 

[Glen Boise]

When talking about EV affordability, we should remember the standard model for introducing new technology products. They start out at high prices sold only to the wealthy or to hobbyists. As the technology improves, prices come down and become more affordable to more and more people. This is what happened with automobiles, computers, cell phones, and so many other products. We are seeing the same thing with EVs today.
Just look at Tesla. Their first car was the Roadster, followed by the Model S and X, followed by the Model 3 and Y. Each new generation had prices lower than the previous ones. So we are seeing prices come down. It may be too slow for some/many, but they are coming down with products that are better than previous generations.

 

[dnlsatriani]

Most people switch to EV because it suppose to be way cheaper than driving on gas. Even all advertisements are how much you can save per year. Unfortunately from what i am seeing the cost of driving EV vs ICE is pretty tight for now. You guys always calculate how much it will cost from point A to point B EV vs ICE but never ask yourself how much more you paid for your EV (just because its an EV its $50000 and above and you prepaid your fuel for couple years ahead). At least to me to save because you switched you have to:
1. Drive a lot per month
2 Charge only on low peak or at home only
3 Keep this car for a long time
4 You don't care about the money
To me EV low cost energy is not there yet but it will happen in the future. And the main pros for now are because it looks cool to have EV ( accelerate fast, its a new tech, nice to try something different, ect ) and you are saving the environment with no emissions.
Be honest and ask yourself why you are buying an EV. i am sure in 80% saving from gas is not the case.

 

[mjs020294]

EVs come into their own if you do shorter trips and only charge at home, especially if you use off peak or solar charging. If I regularly did round trips over 200 miles I wouldn't get an EV. Maybe when/if solid state batteries or something similair hits the market EVs will become more viable for longer trips.

 

[RickMachE]

Most people switch to EV because it suppose to be way cheaper than driving on gas. Even all advertisements are how much you can save per year. Unfortunately from what i am seeing the cost of driving EV vs ICE is pretty tight for now. You guys always calculate how much it will cost from point A to point B EV vs ICE but never ask yourself how much more you paid for your EV (just because its an EV its $50000 and above and you prepaid your fuel for couple years ahead). At least to me to save because you switched you have to:
1. Drive a lot per month
2 Charge only on low peak or at home only
3 Keep this car for a long time
4 You don't care about the money
To me EV low cost energy is not there yet but it will happen in the future. And the main pros for now are because it looks cool to have EV ( accelerate fast, its a new tech, nice to try something different, ect ) and you are saving the environment with no emissions.
Be honest and ask yourself why you are buying an EV. i am sure in 80% saving from gas is not the case.

This isn't a valid argument, because if one was going to buy an EV to save money, they wouldn't buy a $60,000 one.

It's also not a valid argument because buying ANY new vehicle over keeping a used vehicle is likely to not save money. I always laugh when people dump their low MPG vehicle to buy a brand new higher MPG vehicle when the breakeven is 10+ years away...

My 2013 F-150 cost me tires this year and battery. Otherwise, no maintenance in 9 years of ownership. While I may only get 15mpg in winter, and 18 on highway, I can't do math that tells me that the Mach-E will save me money over it.

Anyone who bought a Mach-E to save money is math challenged.

A more valid argument is which car to take on a trip. Just did a 1,500 mile roundtrip with the Mach-E, spending around $90. In my F-150, with gas at $4.15 and getting 18mpg, that would have cost $345. I save money...

Sponsored