Faulty math article on EV v ICE

[devmach-e]

You are right, but even at 15cents/kWh, that's still higher than other states like Az that's <10 cents/kWh. Why is CA 50% to 1000% more expensive than a state right next to it? That's just plain nuts. Someone is siphoning money.

Because IOUs are beholden to their shareholders and not to the communities they serve. That and CPUC tends to rubber stamp most of their rate increases. Oh, and a pretty large state means lots and lots of expensive transmissions lines, especially In some of the more challenging geographical areas of the state. Plus the shift away from very cheap but polluting forms of generation.

Sponsored

 

[devmach-e]

CA does a lot of things in the name of "progress." There are days when CA makes too much power from solar that they have to PAY other states to take their excess power.

Let’s not pretend California is alone in its challenges. Texas has been known to pay people to take excess wind energy, or tell wind farm operators to disconnect from the grid because they can’t use the electricity at that time.

 

[Ghost Ryder]

Let’s not pretend California is alone in its challenges. Texas has been known to pay people to take excess wind energy, or tell wind farm operators to disconnect from the grid because they can’t use the electricity at that time.

I think you got wrong. The wind farm operator pays the State Grid operators to take excess power that they can't sell. The state does not pay other states to take the power. This is vastly different from CA where the state pays other states to take it's excess power.

https://www.greentechmedia.com/arti...Texas, some wind energy,power they can't sell.

 

[Ghost Ryder]

Because IOUs are beholden to their shareholders and not to the communities they serve. That and CPUC tends to rubber stamp most of their rate increases. Oh, and a pretty large state means lots and lots of expensive transmissions lines, especially In some of the more challenging geographical areas of the state. Plus the shift away from very cheap but polluting forms of generation.

Don't kid yourself, no Company whether gov't or privately owned is beholden to the communities they serve.

Texas is a pretty large state, their rates are half of California. Ca high rates are self inflicted, including closing down safe and clean nuclear plants.

 

[devmach-e]

Don't kid yourself, no Company whether gov't or privately owned is beholden to the communities they serve.

Texas is a pretty large state, their rates are half of California. Ca high rates are self inflicted, including closing down safe and clean nuclear plants.

Electricity rates from municipal utilities are much lower than the IOUs in California. More or less as cheap as what the average rate is in Texas (14.49 cents a kWh). Even LADWP isn't nearly as expensive as PG&E.

 

[devmach-e]

I think you got wrong. The wind farm operator pays the State Grid operators to take excess power that they can't sell. The state does not pay other states to take the power. This is vastly different from CA where the state pays other states to take it's excess power.

https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/texas-wind-farms-paying-people-to-take-power-5347#:~:text=In Texas, some wind energy,power they can't sell.

Here's a more recent article (not 15 years old) about windfarms in Texas are being told to disconnect because there's too much power being generated in the region and can't be moved elsewhere in the state.

“We’re at a moment when wind is at its peak production profile, but we see a lot of wind energy being curtailed or congested and not able to flow through to some of the higher-population areas,” said John Hensley, vice president for research and analytics at the American Clean Power Association. “Which is a loss for ratepayers and a loss for those energy consumers that now have to either face conserving energy or paying more for the energy they do use because they don’t have access to that lower-cost wind resource.”

And when the rest of the state is asked to conserve energy to help stabilize the grid, the High Plains has to turn off turbines to limit wind production it doesn’t need.

“Because there’s not enough transmission to move it where it’s needed, ERCOT has to throttle back the [wind] generators,” energy lawyer Michael Jewell said. “They actually tell the wind generators to stop generating electricity. It gets to the point where [wind farm operators] literally have to disengage the generators entirely and stop them from doing anything.”

https://www.texastribune.org/2022/08/02/texas-high-plains-wind-energy/

So let's stop pretending that California is the only state that has generation and transmission issues. Or that California still has to pay other states to take their excess solar/wind production. That might've been true 6 years for a few days out of the year, but that doesn't necessarily represent what is going on now.

 

[smoke20]

This is really shady math and complete BS...

Checking their source (U.S. Energy Information Administration), the price per kWh in Michigan for May 2023 was $0.1856.

They claim it was $12.55 for an entry level EV to go 100 miles. That math ($12.55 / $0.1856) equates to 67.62 kWh used to travel 100 miles which equates to (100 / 67.62) 1.48 miles per kWh.

That is complete BS. Now I realize they are factoring in more than just the kWh cost as they are amortizing charger costs (which would be miniscule) and including taxes (not sure what EV taxes are out there). But this is a total joke

...and I believe the article tossed in the cost of 'time' to charge at a public station. Sad article.

 

[TheSteelRider]

the article refers to this study. the study itself states that it used $0.17/kwh for the home charging cost. i truly cannot comprehend how it came to the conclusions it did

https://www.andersoneconomicgroup.com/many-gas-powered-cars-cheaper-to-fuel-than-electric-in-2023/

sharing in case someone else smarter than me can figure out what the heck these people did [wrong]

Here are a couple of things from their source that are adding to the "charging cost" for EVs, I am sure there are more

1. "amortizing the costs of any residential charging equipment over 5 years"
2. "EV registration fees in the Midwest or State of Michigan"
3. "The excise taxes charged for road"
   1. In other words, they describe that since there are not yet state or federal road taxes on EV "fillups' that they include in the cost an estimate of what it would be if there were such excise taxes
4. Charge loss -- "For residential charging, between 80% and 92% of the electricity used by the charging system ends up as useful energy in the
   battery. Careful calculations include that efficiency loss."

It appears as you have noted, they use Michican base rates for both at-home and commercial charging.
"In Michigan, for example, the cost for residential charging was about $0.17
per kWh in 2021. For commercial charging it was around $0.43 per kWh."

Also, for EV's their "home charging" is, in fact, assuming only 75% home charging and 25% public charger charging.

So they take that base $0.17 / KWh for 75% of the charge and base $0.43 per KWh for 25% of the charge, they add in those above adjustments, and that is their number for EVs.

When I dig into the data, if you charge a more reasonable 90% at-home, then EV fueling costs, even including all the questionable ad-ins, is statically and markedly less than ICE.

Sponsored