Electric cars - Tesla and global - Page 2
Close
Login to Your Account
Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 164
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    7,442
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    234
    Likes (Received)
    1484

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hanermo View Post
    I disagree on Your comment re: road taxes.
    There is no taxation on fuel or cars in the USA or (most, maybe any ?? OECD) *to pay for roads*.
    Afaik.
    It is a tax that is not earmarked, and goes into the general fund.
    A tax-called "road-tax" that goes into the general fund does not itself pay for roads.
    .
    Quote:

    The Highway Trust Fund is a transportation fund in the United States which receives money from a federal fuel tax of 18.4 cents per gallon on gasoline and 24.4 cents per gallon of diesel fuel and related excise taxes.[1] It currently has two accounts, the Highway Account which funds road construction and other surface transportation projects, and a smaller 'Mass Transit Account' which supports mass transit.
    Also, there are additional taxes levied on gasoline for the same purpose by individual states, the rate of which and the method of collection greatly varies state by state.

    Gas taxes operate under the benefit principle. In general, gas taxes are used to provide revenue for road construction, maintenance, repair, and improvements, but states are moving away from this approach.
    The fact that states often use these taxes as a piggybank does not mean they aren't earmarked for transportation related expenses, it just means that they are piggies.
    Argument can be made that the current level ( typically a fixed amount per gallon ) of taxation is inadequate for properly funding the infrastructure.
    That argument is actually being made, often citing the increased costs vs. the more efficient vehicles of today. ( see where I'm going with this ? )

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Northern Il
    Posts
    899
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    557
    Likes (Received)
    883

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by michiganbuck View Post
    Think all states pay about 18 cents federal per gallon of gas. California and Michigan are about .38 or .39 with total state and federal..Yes it is supposed to go to roads and the like.
    I think Ohio has about the lowest here abouts but could be wrong on that.

    Electrics will have to pay a share if their numbers go high and we want good roads.
    Think we pay about 14 cents per kilowatt hour but don't have an electric bill handy.

    So at .14 how much electric would be needed to run 12,000 miles a year. That is about how much I n so paying about $1500 for gas and perhaps $228 for gas tax.. Yes that is a lot of driving. Used to write off part of my gas for deliveries but now let UPS do the driving.

    Here is the chart , looks like I am high on California and Michigan
    http://www.taxadmin.org/assets/docs/...h/Rates/mf.pdf

    but here th tax is said to be higher..California gas taxes: Higher than advertised - Watchdog.org
    I would also add that there are Federal Excise taxes on tires that are earmarked for road use also in addition to vehicle "tags".

    The other issue with the motor fuel taxes has been that as higher fuel mileage has been mandated, the actual revenues have been decreasing on $/mile driven basis.

    States like Illinois also have a sales tax that is a percentage based on the sale price/gal. of the fuel which means low pump prices cause reduced state revenue.

    If you remove the purchase rebate program, add the associated motor fuel taxes, and add in the average $/kwhr that we pay with all taxes included, I don't think that the BEV looks so great for most Americans.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Michigan
    Posts
    7,841
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2272
    Likes (Received)
    2534

    Default

    Like so much the real costs are often hidden by an agenda to make a change..some times with the truth told some things are not as good as what people are told or led to think.

  4. Likes Scottl, Ziggy2, t.jones liked this post
  5. #24
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    barcelona, spain
    Posts
    2,063
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    409
    Likes (Received)
    1123

    Default

    I don´t see Your point on a technical level.
    The drive changes the frequency, no ? so it is a Variable Frequency Drive ?
    Even Tesla calls it a VFD in some presentations.

    Some may use sensors for better accuracy or indexing.
    Some may use encoders.
    Today, VFDs may be == servo drives in many ways.

    But all are still 3-phase drives with variable frequency.
    I just don´t get the point.
    Sure, vector drives may be better vs old static VFDs.
    The ones selling vector drives sell them as variable frequency drives, in general, afaik.

    My whole point was that
    - advanced VFDs are important, and
    - Tesla designs and makes them,
    - has been doing this for many years,
    - has 12+ versions in production with great results,
    - is a leader in the industry.

    In general imo, all VFDs that drive 3-phase motors are in the same category.
    Inverters.
    Some are more advanced, some less.
    I don´t see where the seeming stress comes from.

    I never said anything negative, disparaging, or incorrect on any particular product. Afaik.
    Tech. details removed.
    I have no refuttal, nothing negative, to say.

    You are extremely skilled, experienced, and capable, motion guru.
    Well regarded by me as well as lots of others in here.
    I don´t understand the negativity, that´s all.

    If You equate me with the "fake news" crowd I am very disappointed, sad, and hurt.
    There is zero redress, and nothing can be done in the future.
    So You choose to label me along with the crowd as we all know, well...
    Whats fake news have I done ?

    I strive to be a most level-headed, fair, balanced person .. on the site .. I think .. in that I always take into account the other sides arguments, and always accept, and also point out and accept, the weaknesses in what might be my preference(s) or those of my references.

    I have never called on You, or others, personally.
    It seems to me to demean me, and the issue.

    And in this particular case, where the facts seem not to be overly in Your favour, I am neither trying to boast, browbeat You, or crow.
    Perhaps You, or I, or both, expressed or saw things in a less than positive/correct manner.

    I assure You there was no rancor nor much less intent on my side, and I have never expressed doubt on Your technical skills (or otherwise).
    Anything else, is up to Your soul, pride, and personal standing.



    Quote Originally Posted by motion guru View Post
    Hanermo . . . as someone who has worked in the industry for 25+ years . . . referring to an inverter that employs closed loop management of stator current with respect to rotor position as a "VFD" is akin to referring to the Sun as a big Flashlight.

    This is starting to sound like "Fake News" . . . are you on the Soros payroll?

  6. Likes Tyrone Shoelaces liked this post
  7. #25
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    barcelona, spain
    Posts
    2,063
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    409
    Likes (Received)
    1123

    Default

    Of course the amount is inadequate.
    The USA is the ONLY (+/-) wealthy country to not tax gas/oil or develop the infrastructure as a consequence.
    Should You do so ?
    Well, up to You.
    Several, snide, impolite comments have been made, in the past, to me and others from out-of-usa. Usually incorrect, imo.

    As I (have always said,) You have chosen not to tax gas/oil, and not to directly fund roads & infrastructure with some funds collected.
    Good for You, your choice.
    Now You in the US may change that, partly, or more generally.
    Good for You, your choice.

    I have no idea of how the USA should fund road infrastructure.
    No opinion.
    The only point I have, at most, is that it is useful to have some mechanism for paying for roads.
    And if a purported gas tax does not do so, it is useful to be aware of the fact.

    I personally do not think, at all, that taxing gas was a good idea globally.
    I think it was a terrible idea, but is also now impossible to remove.
    In most developed economies the taxation basis and system is mostly VAT, gas & sundries, some personal, some company, rest is trivial.
    Gas taxes globally are a totally vital part of the economy, and any economy would fail in 2 weeks without them.
    Obviously, new mechanisms and taxes will appear.

    However, power in electricity is 5-7x cheaper per km used on BEVs, and thus the government is saving major money in imports of hydrocarbons.
    So if say the gov loses 1B in tax revenue on electricity, but gains 1.5B on reduced oil purchases, it is not at all clear they want to tax or attack the BEV industry heavily.
    And mostly, they get secondary benefits in dependency, and reduced pollution etc.




    Quote Originally Posted by SeymourDumore View Post
    Argument can be made that the current level ( typically a fixed amount per gallon ) of taxation is inadequate for properly funding the infrastructure.
    )

  8. #26
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Washington
    Posts
    4,351
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1876
    Likes (Received)
    3351

    Default

    hanermo - I have worked on several electric vehicle projects specifically on the inverter / powertrain design as well as battery simulators and endurance test stands. I can assure you that none of the people we worked with nor any of my fellow engineers use the term VFD simply due to the fact that this term in the industries we work within is freighted with the common notion of being an open loop V/Hz drive which is dramatically different from an FOC drive.

    In scanning the number of posts you have made on this topic, it is clear that it holds a high level of interest for you. I commend you not only for your interest, but also your ability to articulate in a clear manner in a language that is not your first.

    That being said - I believe at last count, Tesla was roughly $2.5 billion in debt. After over 40 consecutive quarters of losing money, they made money for precisely 1 quarter . . .

    I think that GM has a better chance of success with their upcoming EV than Tesla will have with the model 3 . . . yet again, for a great number of people it will be remain unaffordable and impractical for some time to come.

  9. Likes tdmidget, jCandlish, t.jones, Scottl liked this post
  10. #27
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    7,442
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    234
    Likes (Received)
    1484

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hanermo View Post
    As I (have always said,) You have chosen not to tax gas/oil, and not to directly fund roads & infrastructure with some funds collected.

    The only point I have, at most, is that it is useful to have some mechanism for paying for roads.
    And if a purported gas tax does not do so, it is useful to be aware of the fact.

    .
    I'm sorry, I'm out looking for a brick wall ....

  11. Likes Scottl liked this post
  12. #28
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    6,477
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    327
    Likes (Received)
    2641

    Default

    Ok, they've made great strides in electric vehicles. I don't believe they will work in my world where temperatures vary by 120F during the year. Also, its a long way to anywhere. Gasoline's 10x power density on a net basis will be an insurmountable obstacle near term.

    But I want to see some of that battery technology in other things I do use. What are cell phone batteries now, 1.2-1.4amp*hr at 3 volts? And the actual battery is just a small fraction of the size of a cell phone? I want some of them to power my cordless tools! And what about mobility products for for handicapped and elderly?

    Hanermo, Tesla is on the bleeding edge. There is an old axiom here in the states that its the third money to make a profit on a new idea. I understand some of the possibilities, but even if there was a perfect product available today the inertia of the ICE is much greater than you are able to fathom.

  13. Likes Scottl, Oldwrench liked this post
  14. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Farmersville, oh (Dayton/Cinti area)
    Posts
    1,651
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    297
    Likes (Received)
    160

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by michiganbuck View Post
    Think all states pay about 18 cents federal per gallon of gas. California and Michigan are about .38 or .39 with total state and federal..Yes it is supposed to go to roads and the like.
    I think Ohio has about the lowest here abouts but could be wrong on that.

    Electrics will have to pay a share if their numbers go high and we want good roads.
    Think we pay about 14 cents per kilowatt hour but don't have an electric bill handy.

    So at .14 how much electric would be needed to run 12,000 miles a year. That is about how much I n so paying about $1500 for gas and perhaps $228 for gas tax.. Yes that is a lot of driving. Used to write off part of my gas for deliveries but now let UPS do the driving.

    Here is the chart , looks like I am high on California and Michigan
    http://www.taxadmin.org/assets/docs/...h/Rates/mf.pdf

    but here th tax is said to be higher..California gas taxes: Higher than advertised - Watchdog.org
    I think my ev cost for 12000 miles was about $400.00 total.... will post details tomorrow when by computer....

    Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Farmersville, oh (Dayton/Cinti area)
    Posts
    1,651
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    297
    Likes (Received)
    160

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by motion guru View Post
    hanermo - I have worked on several electric vehicle projects specifically on the inverter / powertrain design as well as battery simulators and endurance test stands. I can assure you that none of the people we worked with nor any of my fellow engineers use the term VFD simply due to the fact that this term in the industries we work within is freighted with the common notion of being an open loop V/Hz drive which is dramatically different from an FOC drive.

    In scanning the number of posts you have made on this topic, it is clear that it holds a high level of interest for you. I commend you not only for your interest, but also your ability to articulate in a clear manner in a language that is not your first.

    That being said - I believe at last count, Tesla was roughly $2.5 billion in debt. After over 40 consecutive quarters of losing money, they made money for precisely 1 quarter . . .

    I think that GM has a better chance of success with their upcoming EV than Tesla will have with the model 3 . . . yet again, for a great number of people it will be remain unaffordable and impractical for some time to come.
    Things may change if tesla manages a slightly over unity motor in a few years...

    Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

  16. #31
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Woodland Hills, Ca. and some times Hutchinson, Ks.
    Posts
    2,083
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    4
    Likes (Received)
    379

    Default

    I think the Chevy Bolt will do better that Tesla's model 3, from what I have read GM has the best battery technology in production. It is one thing to have a grand idea, another to deliver a product. The technology transport that Gbent mentioned is a huge part of the puzzle. From back up power to remote off grid systems battery density is the key

    There is a guy that took a couple of GM Volt battery packs, one third of a Volt battery and put in a golf cart. The cart could run all day on a charge Vs having to charge every round of golf. A course could reduce their cart inventory by a factor of 3 or 4 with that change alone. There are battery APU's for trucks that could take advantage of this as well right now. These may seem like drips in the bucket but, this is just two of hundreds of applications that will change profoundly because of battery technology.

    Liquid fuel is going to be hard to beat in long range autonomous transportation, particularly airplanes, ships and, trucks in remote areas. Yes there are some large ships experimenting with LNG and, several US railroads have tried it as well. There are issues with cryogenic fuels that liquid and higher temp gaseous fuels don't have. While I can see 30-50% of surface transportation going electric over the next 20-30 years, liquid fuel is not going to be replaced and, levels of consumption MAY increase in spite of electric vehicles. Hundreds of new airplanes and dozens of new ships every year, hundreds of thousands of trucks and millions of cars. Lots of people live far enough from major markets to keep fuel burning vehicle sales alive for the foreseeable future.

    Steve

    PS,
    The states and federal government both collect fuel taxes on ALL road fuel sold in the US. Many other countries tax fuel at higher rates but, there is no free lunch on fuel in the US

  17. Likes Scottl liked this post
  18. #32
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    barcelona, spain
    Posts
    2,063
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    409
    Likes (Received)
    1123

    Default

    I think You might miss global costs.

    The global reality is that average gas prices are 1.2€ / liter, approx 6€/gallon.
    A 65 l tanks == 78 € = 90$.
    About 4-5 times per month, 450$ /month.

    Gas and diesel, per liter
    Netherlands 1.67 EUR 1.35 EUR
    Norway 1.81 EUR 1.69 EUR
    Poland 1.08 EUR 1.06 EUR
    Portugal 1.57 EUR 1.34 EUR
    So about 1.67 € x 1.1 ($) x 3,84 = 7.05$ / US gallon.

    The model 3 competes with a performance upscale vehicle, BMW3 series, Audi A4 series etc.
    Nighttime electric car rates are typically 0.02-0.04€ /kWh.
    100 kWh (3-7 days use) == 0.7 tanks of gas, == 4 €.

    For 90% of the OECD countries, any powerful, compelling electric vehicle like a 35.000 € Tesla model 3, is about HALF THE COST of a BMW 3 series.
    This is ex-subsidy.

    Demand will be several million units per year, at first.
    Every single professional user in the EU, for example.
    Every taxi, government vehicle, fleet vehicle, chauffeur, package delivery, salesman, commercial rep, etc.

    Just on taxi use alone, about 2M Tesla model 3s or similar would likely be immediately sold, if available.
    Just in the EU, demand is over 2M units. Today.
    Because they cost, financed, with fuel, about 300€ per month vs 600€ per month.
    Half the total cost.
    Without any subsidies.
    Ignoring the lack of noise, more space, safer, more powerful acceleration. Ignoring subsidies. Ignoring "green".

    Because globally gas is expensive. Everywhere but the USA.

    Today, Germany will give 6000€, France 8000€, Spain 10.000 €, for a model 3 as a subsidy at moment of purchase. Not tax credit. Off the cost.

    Free parking in cities ! Free motorway passes !
    This makes the business case totally overwhelming.

    Obviously the subsidies will go away in time, but that is very hard to do, politically, at the moment, and career suicide for politicians, now.
    I use the Model 3 as an example only - any other good BEV would work as well.

    The Bolt is unnecessarily complex, has a cooler and other unneeeded crap in the front area similar to a gas car. Pictures online.
    1. This makes it much less safe by perhaps 10x.
    The crumple zone is half vs a Tesla in length, and 2 pwr 4 = 16.
    It also has 2. limited performance, and a 3. battery that is too small, and 3. slow charging.

    All 4. are major limitations, given that we have seen from Tesla that better options exist.

    A 35.000 performance upscale BEV is much cheaper than a 20.000 € starter car, per month, for 743 million EU persons, most of whom are well educated and relatively wealthy by global standards.

    It seems to me obvious that both private users and taxi fleets will immediately transition to the Tesla model 3 / anything comparable, once anything similar exists.

    A Bolt for comparison would be less compelling as a taxi, with slow 25 kW charging, or 50 kW charging that is not available anywhere today.
    For those cases where charge is limited, fast-charging the taxi during lunch break, makes it possible to continue operating, where fast supercharging or perhaps future CCS/chademo/etc supercharging is available.

    A taxi etc. needs to be able to charge fast, although it is to an extent possible to fast-charge, nighttime at home, cheap, at 20 kW (Tesla EU charger, 3 phase, 2x10 kW). 500€.
    A Tesla. A Bolt, no.
    This is strictly a technological point, like most of my comments re: BEVs.

    Once BOLTs, et.al. also allow charging at home from universally available 3 phase outlets, with a cheap 500€ install, at 20 kW, they become equally capable. Today, no.
    A commercial charger overbilling at say 0.30€ / kW is an obvious impossibility, due to operating costs vs nighttime power rates at 0.04 € / kW.

    This will also reduce gas and diesel imports to the EU by about 40%, or more, almost overnight, since all gas and diesel is imported into the EU (and trucking is less important).

    This is great for energy security, the environment, national economies, our health, and our standard of living.
    The savings in gas, major, for 90% of EU AND OECD people, lead to more wealth, thus more spending, thus a better result overall.


    Quote Originally Posted by motion guru View Post
    h. . . yet again, for a great number of people it will be remain unaffordable and impractical for some time to come.

  19. #33
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    barcelona, spain
    Posts
    2,063
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    409
    Likes (Received)
    1123

    Default

    Fwiw, the "GM battery tech" is outsourced from LG, and is about 50% of the energy density, and 200% of the cost (at 220$/kWH/pack), of the new Tesla / Panasonic battery, version 2710.
    Tesla uses a more energy dense NMC chemistry than almost everyone else uses in cars.

    About 140 Wh/kg, for the current older 18650-C battery cells.
    Tesla has said (Straubel) that they got 30% more on the new cells, so => 180 W/kg.
    This also means costs went down 30%, so => 120$ / kWh/pack.

    Mass production of 2710 started January 4, 2017 for Tesla energy use, and starts production for cars in 2Q, 2017.

    The current energy density in the old Tesla Model S/X batteries is about twice as good as the nearest competitor sold *to date*, pre GM Bolt, 1/2017.
    The battery cell is the 18650-C, the -C is the secret Tesla-electric-car only version.

    The next battery specs are supposed to be seen in March at the battery conference, presentation by Dahn.
    It will likely be about 200 Wh/kg, and thus == 45% better than the nearest competitor, Bolt.
    And likely cost about 100-130$/pack level, or == 80-100 $/cell level.

    Dahn is the nr 1 researcher of battery tech in the world, used to head Panasonic battery research labs, now with Tesla, and was the lead negotiator for Tesla for their battery contracts with Panasonic.

    This is how it works.
    We know the older Tesla battery is 544 kg (they have been taken apart and measured).
    520 kg / 85 kWh = 156 Wh/kg.
    New ones, promised at around 200 Wh/kg by Straubel of Tesla.

    The Bolt is supposedly about 435 kg/60kW, so 137 Wh/kg.

    The Bolt battery is actually a great result.
    And three times as energy dense as the old Spark.
    And the Bolt is far and away better than anything else, apart from Tesla.
    So GM did really well in it.
    I checked the Bolt numbers, and fixed my initial errors. GM did really well (300% improvement !).

    But GM still got left out by about 45% on mass/power aka energy density, and 45% on battery costs.

    Lion batteries cost about 50-60$ in materials, today, and about 40$, soon (3 years), when production volumes go up 10 fold, as they are doing.

    So the current costs will go to about 70-80$, for Tesla, soon (1 year), still leaving Panasonic with a very, very healthy 10-15$ margin/kWh.
    80 kW x 15 = 1200$ margin for Pana as the battery manufacturer.
    1000 cars/day, 1.2 M$ net profit.
    438 M$/year profit for Panasonic.

    No wonder Panasonic wanted to invest 1.6 B. It is insanely profitable for them.

    The next-gen circa 2021, will be approx 300Wh/kg, 50$ cost/Tesla, 40$/Pana.
    This gets us electric airplanes, except transcontinental.
    Oh, and no ICE cars are competitive at that level, anywhere in the world, including places like Malaysia with 0.20$ / l gas.

    But this will all be "obvious" to everyone by 2018, after everyone had said it will take 10-20-30 years.
    Prediction:
    The auto market "tilts" and disruption happens, 2018, +/- 1 year.
    As I predicted 2016 here and elsewhere.

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve in SoCal View Post
    I think the Chevy Bolt will do better that Tesla's model 3, from what I have read GM has the best battery technology in production.

  20. #34
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    barcelona, spain
    Posts
    2,063
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    409
    Likes (Received)
    1123

    Default

    Yearly costs.
    383 $ total costs off-peak.
    153 $ total fuel costs, electric car rate, USA. Link 1.
    DTE Energy.
    I don´t know if DTE applies to You, but similar plans are typical all over.
    537 $ avg at 0.14$/kWh.

    0.14$/kWh x 12.000 x 1.6 x 0.2 kWh/km == 537 $/year.

    Nighttime power rates are cheaper.
    0.039$, link 1.
    0.010$/kWh, off-peak.

    link 1 to DTE Energy.

    DTE Energy - Rate Options!

    Quote Originally Posted by michiganbuck View Post
    So at .14 how much electric would be needed to run 12,000 miles a year.

    That is about how much I n so paying about $1500 for gas and perhaps $228 for gas tax..

  21. Likes t.jones liked this post
  22. #35
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Detroit, MI
    Posts
    421
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    312
    Likes (Received)
    148

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hanermo View Post
    Yearly costs.
    383 $ total costs off-peak.
    153 $ total fuel costs, electric car rate, USA. Link 1.
    DTE Energy.
    I don´t know if DTE applies to You, but similar plans are typical all over.
    537 $ avg at 0.14$/kWh.

    0.14$/kWh x 12.000 x 1.6 x 0.2 kWh/km == 537 $/year.

    Nighttime power rates are cheaper.
    0.039$, link 1.
    0.010$/kWh, off-peak.

    link 1 to DTE Energy.

    DTE Energy - Rate Options!

    DTE also recommends a separate meter for an EV, as the rates differ from their normal rates. They were offering free level two charges for awhile, but I missed that deal.


    I JUST bought a used Nissan Leaf. Just show'd up yesterday. I couldn't be more happy with my purchase so far. My normal commute is a massive 3 miles a day, which is a good way to kill a normal gasser - the oil never heats up!


    State of Michigan now charges more for registering an EV, as it cuts into roadtax by not buying fuel.

  23. Likes t.jones, Scottl liked this post
  24. #36
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Farmersville, oh (Dayton/Cinti area)
    Posts
    1,651
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    297
    Likes (Received)
    160

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mike_kilroy View Post
    I think my ev cost for 12000 miles was about $400.00 total.... will post details tomorrow when by computer....

    Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
    My typical daily drive was 25-30 miles... here is example chart of my tracking daily cost for the 3 years I ran this BEV. Cost was easily 1/4 or less than gas equiv miles.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails amp_electric-28kwh-ev.jpg  

  25. #37
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    6,477
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    327
    Likes (Received)
    2641

    Default

    Hanermo,
    The error you consistently make is petroleum fuel cost. Gas is not $6/gallon average cost. Gas is $1.50/gallon average cost PLUS TAXES. If you reduce the government take from taxes associated with fuel that tax money has to be made up elsewhere.

    Yes, early adopters get a tax break. But that tax break will only exist until the revenue reductions become noticeable.

  26. Likes Modelman, Scottl liked this post
  27. #38
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    barcelona, spain
    Posts
    2,063
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    409
    Likes (Received)
    1123

    Default

    No, I do not make an error.

    The USA is the only wealthy country NOT TO tax fuel heavily.
    This is seen by most-all economists as a major subsidy.


    The base case in economics is this.
    Importing refined fuels like gas costs a country money.
    Importing less, costs a country less money.
    No matter what.
    The difference is made from electricity, which is much cheaper to make and use, for mobility aka cars and other transport, per mile used.

    The difference is about 5-fold, 5-700%, depending on what or how you measure, and where.
    This is a technical measure, not a political measure based on fuel taxes.

    The major losers, are the hydrocarbon industries.
    The major winner is everyone, ie the population, and the economy.

    If you move from a more-expensive system, aka gas, to a less expensive system aka electricity-for-cars, you make a net economic profit. Overall.

    The secondary effects in needing less refineries, pipelines, tankers, gas station are all also major.
    You save a lot of money.
    The secondary effects in needing less healthcare are major on a GDP basis.
    You save a lot of money.
    The secondary effects in energy independency and security are also important.

    Gas/oil/diesel works like this.
    Prospected/drilled/pumped/transported multiple times/refined/distributed/used.

    All this costs money/energy - about half the oil is spent, to get it to a car.
    (And yes, I looked it up previously. Numerous sources.).
    In a conventional ICE car, about 70% of the energy is then wasted, again.
    About 5% of total gas goes into work, aka use (in cars). 95% is wasted, cradle-to-grave comparison.

    Likewise, in producing electric power, a lot of it is also wasted.
    Nothing is perfectly efficient.
    Emissions controls, transmission line losses, substations, etc.
    About 25-40% of total electricity goes into work, aka use. 60% is wasted.

    The decisive key point is that from a macro perspective, more efficient = better, as in more profitable to the system.

    The petro industry I think is about 5 trillion $ per year.
    The price is going up, as a trend.
    Reducing it say 50%, saves the world 2.5 trillion, at a cost of say .8T.
    Net saving, 1.7 trillion $.
    The energy production cost is going down, as a trend.

    Link to the 5T$ here.
    What percentage of the global economy is comprised of the oil & gas drilling sector? | Investopedia

    Most economies spend about 10% of their GDP on the petro industry.
    Iirc the US is about 12%.
    Reducing that say 50%, makes the country richer.

    Quote Originally Posted by gbent View Post
    Hanermo,
    The error you consistently make is petroleum fuel cost. Gas is not $6/gallon average cost. Gas is $1.50/gallon average cost PLUS TAXES. If you reduce the government take from taxes associated with fuel that tax money has to be made up elsewhere.

    Yes, early adopters get a tax break. But that tax break will only exist until the revenue reductions become noticeable.

  28. Likes neilho liked this post
  29. #39
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    6,477
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    327
    Likes (Received)
    2641

    Default

    Ok, given your rosy predictions of electric car adaption, what year will governments have to start replacing petroleum taxes with some other income source? Governments absolutely won't stand lower tax collections for any longer than the next budget cycle.

    Personally, I do not view the USA lack of extreme taxes on petroleum fuels as a subsidy for petroleum. Instead, I view it as a subsidy for electric vehicles in countries such as the EU with extreme petroleum fuel taxes.

  30. Likes Scottl, Oldwrench liked this post
  31. #40
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    uk
    Posts
    11,836
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3153
    Likes (Received)
    5160

    Default

    If tesla makes it over the hump in there finances i think there going to do well, but like most big business ventures its one hell of a financial hump to break through. Only certainty is the larger ever growing market place.

    Over here the other big issue is the pollution levels, that’s gotta be fixed. You need to remember, nearly every were else on the planet is way more crowded and compacted than the USA. Most people in Europe don't drive a hundred miles a day, hell most don't do more than that a week. In the uk, a 200 mile drive will easily take you 4-5 hours or more depending on traffic, your going to want a pit stop before you run out of range once the range gets to those levels over here. A 100 mile range or even 150 is not enough, but clear 200 and at least for most in the uk thats just fine for all but the odd exception. hanermo is spot on its range that most of the competition lacks that needs to be there. Think how many smart phones apple would sell if there battery only lasted 2 hours? Now compare that to a battery thats enough to see most people through a typical day, thats were electric cars are at crossing over from inconvenient to main stream.

    You need to also understand there’s only 350 million of you, you make up a really small part of global auto demand which is growing massively. Theres vast as in truly magnitudes greater markets out there in developing countries if the unit costs can be got low enough. Who ever pulls off the best + cheapest battery tech the fastest is going to win this race. Tesla are very much in front right now, as they bring out ever cheaper models and open up the mass market place there potentially going to have one hell of a lead, if they can do so and turn a profit.

    Other thing most miss here is the convenience of electric, unlike having to go get petrol, you just plug it in. Imagine how popular mobiles would be if you had to go fill them up from only certain places?? Worlds changing, get with it or get out the way!

  32. Likes hanermo liked this post

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •