ADVERTISEMENT

Study finds the true cost of owning an electric vehicle equates to $17 per gallon

RicoSuave102954

HR All-American
Jul 17, 2023
3,275
2,543
113
Montezuma, Iowa
The electric vehicle story seems to have changed lately from an expectation of rapid adoption and frantic production to a reality of cooling interest and pullbacks in investments.

General Motors (GM) - Get Free Report pushed back its EV targets and postponed its coming EV lineup in what it called an effort to ensure profitability; Ford (F) - Get Free Report postponed $12 billion in EV investments; Hertz is slowing the electrification of its fleets, in part citing weak resale value; and Tesla (TSLA) - Get Free Report remains engaged in a price war meant to entice skeptical buyers.

Widespread adoption seems to have hit something of a snag.

While some data show that EV adoption is on the rise, with EV sales making up a record 7.9% of total industry sales in the third quarter, consumer interest is still flagging.

Polling from S&P Global Mobility found in May that only 67% of respondents are open to buying an EV, a significant reduction from the 86% of respondents that were open to such a purchase in 2021.

While EV adoption might be increasing, the growth in the sector is slowing as consumer concerns over both price and range cool interest.

Price biggest hurdle to EV adoption: S&P​

It's no coincidence that Tesla remains so committed to slashing its prices; the biggest pressure point in the transition to EVs, according to S&P, is price.

"Multiple hurdles need to be cleared to achieve widespread EV adoption," S&P wrote. "Buyers may want to wait for the next technological advance, or have concerns about charging time and charger availability, but in the end, consumer finances — not engineering — lead the current buying resistance to EVs."
Part of the gap in the adoption curve additionally involves differences between early adopters and the masses.

Jeremy Michalek, Carnegie Mellon professor of engineering and public policy, told TheStreet in August that the early adopters tend to have garages, meaning they can charge their EVs overnight and at home. For the second, larger wave of adopters who don't have access to overnight charging, better charging infrastructure, more robust batteries and longer vehicle range are key concerns.

EV ownership equates to $17 a gallon: Texas group​

An October report by the Texas Public Policy Foundation found that, after accounting for all of the hidden costs involved in owning an EV, that price becomes much more significant than an internal combustion engine vehicle.

The foundation is a conservative think tank that according to 2012 tax filings was funded predominantly by Exxon Mobil, Chevron and the Koch brothers. The organization, according to the New York Times, has been attempting for years to promote fossil fuels while inciting a pullback in America's transition to renewable energy.

The group has campaigned against green energy, and last year an executive at the organization tweeted: "Today, I’m thankful to live a high-carbon lifestyle and wish the rest of the world could too. Energy poverty = poverty. Decarbonization is dangerous and deadly."

The group's report adds up the costs of government subsidies, charging equipment and the added strain on the electric grid, claiming that the "true cost of fueling an EV would equate to an EV owner paying $17.33 per gallon of gasoline."

When ICE owners pay for a gallon of gasoline, the report says, they are paying for the "entire infrastructure to refine, transport and market that gasoline."

"When an EV owner connects to the electric grid, how much are they paying for the extra generation, transmission, and distribution costs that they are imposing on the grid, and will those embedded costs rise over time?"


The report identifies three different areas of hidden EV ownership costs: the first deals with direct subsidies, such as the $7,500 federal tax credit. The second deals with indirect subsidies, notably an avoidance of state and federal fuel taxes.

This, the report says, is problematic as such taxes are used to fund road construction and maintenance; since EVs are heavier than comparable ICE vehicles, EV owners ought to be paying more in fuel taxes, rather than less.

A component of this indirect subsidy deals with the extra costs placed on the electric grid by EVs.

"Generation, transmission, distribution and overhead costs for utilities are all affected by EVs, and it is crucial for the future of the electric grid that EVs charge at times that reduce demand volatility rather than increase it as is often the case today," the report says.

The final category of the foundation's report involves regulatory electrification and emissions mandates.

Combined, the report found that these hidden costs add around $48,000 to the cost of an average model-year 2021 EV over 10 years.

Even with recently slashed prices and tax incentives, the report said, EVs will remain more expensive than their internal-combustion-engine counterparts for years without "increased and sustained government favors."

A key component of EV costs revolves around their battery components. And while EVs are generally a greener solution to travel (depending on the energy makeup of the grid they charge on), the raw materials needed to make their batteries are somewhat problematic.

Both cobalt and lithium have been linked to environmental concerns and human rights issues, according to the Times. Mining cobalt produces hazardous slag that leaches into the surrounding environment; mining lithium uses an enormous amount of groundwater.

Toyota, which remains staunchly committed to hybrids, said in May that the same raw material used for one long-range EV could instead be used to produce 90 hybrids. The overall carbon reduction of those hybrids, according to Toyota, would be 37 times higher than that of a single EV.




 
Doesn't compute with my Model 3 costs....

By my calculations I'm saving money compared to the Ferrari Van (2001 Dodge Caravan) that I replaced with the Model 3.

The “data” appears to be being generated form such a non-biased source too.

“The foundation is a conservative think tank that according to 2012 tax filings was funded predominantly by Exxon Mobil, Chevron and the Koch brothers. The organization, according to the New York Times, has been attempting for years to promote fossil fuels while inciting a pullback in America's transition to renewable energy.

The group has campaigned against green energy, and last year an executive at the organization tweeted: "Today, I’m thankful to live a high-carbon lifestyle and wish the rest of the world could too. Energy poverty = poverty. Decarbonization is dangerous and deadly."
 
The electric vehicle story seems to have changed lately from an expectation of rapid adoption and frantic production to a reality of cooling interest and pullbacks in investments.

General Motors (GM) - Get Free Report pushed back its EV targets and postponed its coming EV lineup in what it called an effort to ensure profitability; Ford (F) - Get Free Report postponed $12 billion in EV investments; Hertz is slowing the electrification of its fleets, in part citing weak resale value; and Tesla (TSLA) - Get Free Report remains engaged in a price war meant to entice skeptical buyers.

Widespread adoption seems to have hit something of a snag.

While some data show that EV adoption is on the rise, with EV sales making up a record 7.9% of total industry sales in the third quarter, consumer interest is still flagging.

Polling from S&P Global Mobility found in May that only 67% of respondents are open to buying an EV, a significant reduction from the 86% of respondents that were open to such a purchase in 2021.

While EV adoption might be increasing, the growth in the sector is slowing as consumer concerns over both price and range cool interest.

Price biggest hurdle to EV adoption: S&P​

It's no coincidence that Tesla remains so committed to slashing its prices; the biggest pressure point in the transition to EVs, according to S&P, is price.

"Multiple hurdles need to be cleared to achieve widespread EV adoption," S&P wrote. "Buyers may want to wait for the next technological advance, or have concerns about charging time and charger availability, but in the end, consumer finances — not engineering — lead the current buying resistance to EVs."
Part of the gap in the adoption curve additionally involves differences between early adopters and the masses.

Jeremy Michalek, Carnegie Mellon professor of engineering and public policy, told TheStreet in August that the early adopters tend to have garages, meaning they can charge their EVs overnight and at home. For the second, larger wave of adopters who don't have access to overnight charging, better charging infrastructure, more robust batteries and longer vehicle range are key concerns.

EV ownership equates to $17 a gallon: Texas group​

An October report by the Texas Public Policy Foundation found that, after accounting for all of the hidden costs involved in owning an EV, that price becomes much more significant than an internal combustion engine vehicle.

The foundation is a conservative think tank that according to 2012 tax filings was funded predominantly by Exxon Mobil, Chevron and the Koch brothers. The organization, according to the New York Times, has been attempting for years to promote fossil fuels while inciting a pullback in America's transition to renewable energy.

The group has campaigned against green energy, and last year an executive at the organization tweeted: "Today, I’m thankful to live a high-carbon lifestyle and wish the rest of the world could too. Energy poverty = poverty. Decarbonization is dangerous and deadly."

The group's report adds up the costs of government subsidies, charging equipment and the added strain on the electric grid, claiming that the "true cost of fueling an EV would equate to an EV owner paying $17.33 per gallon of gasoline."

When ICE owners pay for a gallon of gasoline, the report says, they are paying for the "entire infrastructure to refine, transport and market that gasoline."

"When an EV owner connects to the electric grid, how much are they paying for the extra generation, transmission, and distribution costs that they are imposing on the grid, and will those embedded costs rise over time?"


The report identifies three different areas of hidden EV ownership costs: the first deals with direct subsidies, such as the $7,500 federal tax credit. The second deals with indirect subsidies, notably an avoidance of state and federal fuel taxes.

This, the report says, is problematic as such taxes are used to fund road construction and maintenance; since EVs are heavier than comparable ICE vehicles, EV owners ought to be paying more in fuel taxes, rather than less.

A component of this indirect subsidy deals with the extra costs placed on the electric grid by EVs.

"Generation, transmission, distribution and overhead costs for utilities are all affected by EVs, and it is crucial for the future of the electric grid that EVs charge at times that reduce demand volatility rather than increase it as is often the case today," the report says.

The final category of the foundation's report involves regulatory electrification and emissions mandates.

Combined, the report found that these hidden costs add around $48,000 to the cost of an average model-year 2021 EV over 10 years.

Even with recently slashed prices and tax incentives, the report said, EVs will remain more expensive than their internal-combustion-engine counterparts for years without "increased and sustained government favors."

A key component of EV costs revolves around their battery components. And while EVs are generally a greener solution to travel (depending on the energy makeup of the grid they charge on), the raw materials needed to make their batteries are somewhat problematic.

Both cobalt and lithium have been linked to environmental concerns and human rights issues, according to the Times. Mining cobalt produces hazardous slag that leaches into the surrounding environment; mining lithium uses an enormous amount of groundwater.

Toyota, which remains staunchly committed to hybrids, said in May that the same raw material used for one long-range EV could instead be used to produce 90 hybrids. The overall carbon reduction of those hybrids, according to Toyota, would be 37 times higher than that of a single EV.




More bullshit brought to you compliment's of RICO! Tge boy just keeps on giving.
 
A big part of their calculations involve the avoidance of fuel taxes that pay for roads. I also have issues with this, but it’s interesting that a conservative organization complains about legal avoidance of taxes, when they are very culpable in the establishment of loopholes in income taxes.
 
More bullshit brought to you compliment's of RICO! Tge boy just keeps on giving.
The group's report adds up the costs of government subsidies, charging equipment and the added strain on the electric grid, claiming that the "true cost of fueling an EV would equate to an EV owner paying $17.33 per gallon of gasoline."
 
I'm the idiot? The Texas Public Policy Foundation produced the report you moran.

Quoting a study by the Texas Public Policy Foundation about EVs is like quoting a study by foxes about who should be guarding the chickens.

This reminds me that I need to put OP on ignore. To paraphrase Darth Vader:

You have wasted 5-10 minutes of my life for the last time, RicoTarde90210.

33231e8fb13d6d176863e6286aa5bb20.jpg
 
The group's report adds up the costs of government subsidies, charging equipment and the added strain on the electric grid, claiming that the "true cost of fueling an EV would equate to an EV owner paying $17.33 per gallon of gasoline."

Texas Public Policy Group (brought to you by Texas Oil, Texas Gas, & ERCOT) take on EV costs:
825zaaekyj681.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Torg
Quoting a study by the Texas Public Policy Foundation about EVs is like quoting a study by foxes about who should be guarding the chickens.

This reminds me that I need to put OP on ignore. To paraphrase Darth Vader:

You have wasted 5-10 minutes of my life for the last time, RicoTarde90210.

33231e8fb13d6d176863e6286aa5bb20.jpg
Well, Rico (Ryan) is a stupid poster so it makes sense to him.
 
The equivalent of $17.00 a gallon and a 100 mile range without a full load.

What’s funny is the opposite is true regarding the costs. On the full year, 12,000 miles, the model Y cost on average $50 per month. I bought it with no government incentive or price reduction. I pay an extra charge each year up front to register it to cover lost gas tax revenue for road costs. I charge overnight when there is no demand on the grid. My utility provider loves my EV, extra revenue for them.

None of your assertions are true in my case.

Your $17/ gallon equivalent is pure fiction. Cooked up by anti-EV forces who see fuel demand destruction with every EV sold.
 
Doesn't compute with my Model 3 costs....

By my calculations I'm saving money compared to the Ferrari Van (2001 Dodge Caravan) that I replaced with the Model 3.
I would echo your same sentiments. I pay a little extra for electricity which goes to offset the cost of the solar grid the utility company built. My energy price is now locked in for 20 years. My model 3 runs on the sun.
 

The Dirty Secrets Of ‘Clean’ Electric Vehicles​


Mining out of sight, out of mind


Let’s start with Elon Musk’s Tesla. In an astonishing achievement for a company that has now posted four consecutive quarters of profits, Tesla is now the world’s most valuable automotive company. Demand for EVs is set to soar, as government policies subsidize the purchase of EVs to replace the internal combustion engine of gasoline and diesel-driven cars and as owning a “clean” and “green” car becomes a moral testament to many a virtue-signaling customer.

Yet, if one looks under the hood of “clean energy” battery-driven EVs, the dirt found would surprise most. The most important component in the EV is the lithium-ion rechargeable battery which relies on critical mineral commodities such as cobalt, graphite, lithium, and manganese. Tracing the source of these minerals, in what is called “full-cycle economics”, it becomes apparent that EVs create a trail of dirt from the mining and processing of minerals upstream.

A recent United Nations report warns that the raw materials used in electric car batteries are highly concentrated in a small number of countries where environmental and labour regulations are weak or non-existent. Thus, battery production for EVs is driving a boom in small-scale or “artisanal” cobalt production in the Democratic Republic of Congo which supplies two thirds of global output of the mineral. These artisanal mines, which account for up to a quarter of the country’s production, have been found to be dangerous and employ child labour.

Mindful of what the image of children scrabbling for hand-dug minerals in Africa can do to high tech’s clean and green image, most tech and auto companies using cobalt and other toxic heavy metals avoid direct sourcing from mines. Tesla Inc.TSLA +0.5% struck a deal last month with Swiss-based Glencore Plc to buy as much as 6,000 tons of cobalt annually from the latter’s Congolese mines. While Tesla has said it aims to remove reputational risks associated with sourcing minerals from countries such as the DRC where corruption is rampant, Glencore assures buyers that no hand-dug cobalt is treated at its mechanized mines.

There are 7.2 million battery EVs or about 1% of the total vehicle fleet today. To get an idea of the scale of mining for raw materials involved in replacing the world’s gasoline and diesel-fueled cars with EVs, we can take the example of the UK as provided by Michael Kelly, the Emeritus Prince Philip Professor of Technology at the University of Cambridge. According to Professor Kelly, if we replace all of the UK vehicle fleet with EVs, assuming they use the most resource-frugal next-generation batteries, we would need the following materials: about twice the annual global production of cobalt; three quarters of the world’s production lithium carbonate; nearly the entire world production of neodymium; and more than half the world’s production of copper in 2018.

And this is just for the UK. Professor Kelly estimates that if we want the whole world to be transported by electric vehicles, the vast increases in the supply of the raw materials listed above would go far beyond known reserves. The environmental and social impact of vastly-expanded mining for these materials — some of which are highly toxic when mined, transported and processed – in countries afflicted by corruption and poor human rights records can only be imagined. The clean and green image of EVs stands in stark contrast to the realities of manufacturing batteries.

Zero Emissions and All That

Proponents of EVs might counter by saying that despite these evident environmental and social problems associated with mining in many third world countries, the case remains that EVs help reduce carbon dioxide emissions associated with the internal combustion engines run on gasoline and diesel fuels. According to the reigning climate change narrative, it is after all carbon dioxide emissions that are threatening environmental catastrophe on a global scale. For the sake of saving the world, the climate crusaders of the richer nations might be willing to ignore the local pollution and human rights violations involved in mining for minerals and rare earths in Africa, China, Latin America and elsewhere.

While one might question the inherent inequity in imposing such a trade-off, the supposed advantages of EVs in emitting lower carbon emissions are overstated according to a peer-reviewed life-cycle study comparing conventional and electric vehicles. To begin with, about half the lifetime carbon-dioxide emissions from an electric car come from the energy used to produce the car, especially in the mining and processing of raw materials needed for the battery. This compares unfavorably with the manufacture of a gasoline-powered car which accounts for 17% of the car’s lifetime carbon-dioxide emissions. When a new EV appears in the show-room, it has already caused 30,000 pounds of carbon-dioxide emission. The equivalent amount for manufacturing a conventional car is 14,000 pounds.

Once on the road, the carbon dioxide emissions of EVs depends on the power-generation fuel used to recharge its battery. If it comes mostly from coal-fired power plants, it will lead to about 15 ounces of carbon-dioxide for every mile it is driven—three ounces more than a similar gasoline-powered car. Even without reference to the source of electricity used for battery charging, if an EV is driven 50,000 miles over its lifetime, the huge initial emissions from its manufacture means the EV will actually have put more carbon-dioxide in the atmosphere than a similar-size gasoline-powered car driven the same number of miles. Even if the EV is driven for 90,000 miles and the battery is charged by cleaner natural-gas fueled power stations, it will cause just 24% less carbon-dioxide emission than a gasoline-powered car. As the skeptical environmentalist Bjorn Lomborg puts it, “This is a far cry from ‘zero emissions’".

As most ordinary people mindful of keeping within modest budgets choose affordable gasoline or diesel-powered cars, experts and policy advisors the world over have felt compelled to tilt the playing field in favor of EVs. EV subsidies are regressive: given their high upfront cost, EVs are only affordable for high-income households. It is egregious that EV subsides are funded by the average tax-payer so that the rich can buy their EVs at subsidized prices.

The determination not to know or to look away when the facts assail our beliefs is an enduring frailty of human nature. The tendency towards group think and confirmation bias, and the will to affirm the “scientific consensus” and marginalize sceptics, are rife in considerations by the so-called experts committed to advocating their favorite cause. In the case of EVs, the dirty secrets of “clean energy” should seem apparent to all but, alas, there are none so blind as those who will not see.

 

The Dirty Secrets Of ‘Clean’ Electric Vehicles​


Mining out of sight, out of mind


Let’s start with Elon Musk’s Tesla. In an astonishing achievement for a company that has now posted four consecutive quarters of profits, Tesla is now the world’s most valuable automotive company. Demand for EVs is set to soar, as government policies subsidize the purchase of EVs to replace the internal combustion engine of gasoline and diesel-driven cars and as owning a “clean” and “green” car becomes a moral testament to many a virtue-signaling customer.

Yet, if one looks under the hood of “clean energy” battery-driven EVs, the dirt found would surprise most. The most important component in the EV is the lithium-ion rechargeable battery which relies on critical mineral commodities such as cobalt, graphite, lithium, and manganese. Tracing the source of these minerals, in what is called “full-cycle economics”, it becomes apparent that EVs create a trail of dirt from the mining and processing of minerals upstream.

A recent United Nations report warns that the raw materials used in electric car batteries are highly concentrated in a small number of countries where environmental and labour regulations are weak or non-existent. Thus, battery production for EVs is driving a boom in small-scale or “artisanal” cobalt production in the Democratic Republic of Congo which supplies two thirds of global output of the mineral. These artisanal mines, which account for up to a quarter of the country’s production, have been found to be dangerous and employ child labour.

Mindful of what the image of children scrabbling for hand-dug minerals in Africa can do to high tech’s clean and green image, most tech and auto companies using cobalt and other toxic heavy metals avoid direct sourcing from mines. Tesla Inc.TSLA +0.5% struck a deal last month with Swiss-based Glencore Plc to buy as much as 6,000 tons of cobalt annually from the latter’s Congolese mines. While Tesla has said it aims to remove reputational risks associated with sourcing minerals from countries such as the DRC where corruption is rampant, Glencore assures buyers that no hand-dug cobalt is treated at its mechanized mines.

There are 7.2 million battery EVs or about 1% of the total vehicle fleet today. To get an idea of the scale of mining for raw materials involved in replacing the world’s gasoline and diesel-fueled cars with EVs, we can take the example of the UK as provided by Michael Kelly, the Emeritus Prince Philip Professor of Technology at the University of Cambridge. According to Professor Kelly, if we replace all of the UK vehicle fleet with EVs, assuming they use the most resource-frugal next-generation batteries, we would need the following materials: about twice the annual global production of cobalt; three quarters of the world’s production lithium carbonate; nearly the entire world production of neodymium; and more than half the world’s production of copper in 2018.

And this is just for the UK. Professor Kelly estimates that if we want the whole world to be transported by electric vehicles, the vast increases in the supply of the raw materials listed above would go far beyond known reserves. The environmental and social impact of vastly-expanded mining for these materials — some of which are highly toxic when mined, transported and processed – in countries afflicted by corruption and poor human rights records can only be imagined. The clean and green image of EVs stands in stark contrast to the realities of manufacturing batteries.

Zero Emissions and All That

Proponents of EVs might counter by saying that despite these evident environmental and social problems associated with mining in many third world countries, the case remains that EVs help reduce carbon dioxide emissions associated with the internal combustion engines run on gasoline and diesel fuels. According to the reigning climate change narrative, it is after all carbon dioxide emissions that are threatening environmental catastrophe on a global scale. For the sake of saving the world, the climate crusaders of the richer nations might be willing to ignore the local pollution and human rights violations involved in mining for minerals and rare earths in Africa, China, Latin America and elsewhere.

While one might question the inherent inequity in imposing such a trade-off, the supposed advantages of EVs in emitting lower carbon emissions are overstated according to a peer-reviewed life-cycle study comparing conventional and electric vehicles. To begin with, about half the lifetime carbon-dioxide emissions from an electric car come from the energy used to produce the car, especially in the mining and processing of raw materials needed for the battery. This compares unfavorably with the manufacture of a gasoline-powered car which accounts for 17% of the car’s lifetime carbon-dioxide emissions. When a new EV appears in the show-room, it has already caused 30,000 pounds of carbon-dioxide emission. The equivalent amount for manufacturing a conventional car is 14,000 pounds.

Once on the road, the carbon dioxide emissions of EVs depends on the power-generation fuel used to recharge its battery. If it comes mostly from coal-fired power plants, it will lead to about 15 ounces of carbon-dioxide for every mile it is driven—three ounces more than a similar gasoline-powered car. Even without reference to the source of electricity used for battery charging, if an EV is driven 50,000 miles over its lifetime, the huge initial emissions from its manufacture means the EV will actually have put more carbon-dioxide in the atmosphere than a similar-size gasoline-powered car driven the same number of miles. Even if the EV is driven for 90,000 miles and the battery is charged by cleaner natural-gas fueled power stations, it will cause just 24% less carbon-dioxide emission than a gasoline-powered car. As the skeptical environmentalist Bjorn Lomborg puts it, “This is a far cry from ‘zero emissions’".

As most ordinary people mindful of keeping within modest budgets choose affordable gasoline or diesel-powered cars, experts and policy advisors the world over have felt compelled to tilt the playing field in favor of EVs. EV subsidies are regressive: given their high upfront cost, EVs are only affordable for high-income households. It is egregious that EV subsides are funded by the average tax-payer so that the rich can buy their EVs at subsidized prices.

The determination not to know or to look away when the facts assail our beliefs is an enduring frailty of human nature. The tendency towards group think and confirmation bias, and the will to affirm the “scientific consensus” and marginalize sceptics, are rife in considerations by the so-called experts committed to advocating their favorite cause. In the case of EVs, the dirty secrets of “clean energy” should seem apparent to all but, alas, there are none so blind as those who will not see.


Lmao


Tilak Doshi​

Contributor|ENERGY

I have worked in the oil and gas sector as an economist in both private industry and in think tanks, in Asia, the Middle East and the US over the past 25 years. I focus on global energy developments from the perspective of Asian countries that remain large markets for oil, gas and coal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DFSNOLE
The electric vehicle story seems to have changed lately from an expectation of rapid adoption and frantic production to a reality of cooling interest and pullbacks in investments.

General Motors (GM) - Get Free Report pushed back its EV targets and postponed its coming EV lineup in what it called an effort to ensure profitability; Ford (F) - Get Free Report postponed $12 billion in EV investments; Hertz is slowing the electrification of its fleets, in part citing weak resale value; and Tesla (TSLA) - Get Free Report remains engaged in a price war meant to entice skeptical buyers.

Widespread adoption seems to have hit something of a snag.

While some data show that EV adoption is on the rise, with EV sales making up a record 7.9% of total industry sales in the third quarter, consumer interest is still flagging.

Polling from S&P Global Mobility found in May that only 67% of respondents are open to buying an EV, a significant reduction from the 86% of respondents that were open to such a purchase in 2021.

While EV adoption might be increasing, the growth in the sector is slowing as consumer concerns over both price and range cool interest.

Price biggest hurdle to EV adoption: S&P​

It's no coincidence that Tesla remains so committed to slashing its prices; the biggest pressure point in the transition to EVs, according to S&P, is price.

"Multiple hurdles need to be cleared to achieve widespread EV adoption," S&P wrote. "Buyers may want to wait for the next technological advance, or have concerns about charging time and charger availability, but in the end, consumer finances — not engineering — lead the current buying resistance to EVs."
Part of the gap in the adoption curve additionally involves differences between early adopters and the masses.

Jeremy Michalek, Carnegie Mellon professor of engineering and public policy, told TheStreet in August that the early adopters tend to have garages, meaning they can charge their EVs overnight and at home. For the second, larger wave of adopters who don't have access to overnight charging, better charging infrastructure, more robust batteries and longer vehicle range are key concerns.

EV ownership equates to $17 a gallon: Texas group​

An October report by the Texas Public Policy Foundation found that, after accounting for all of the hidden costs involved in owning an EV, that price becomes much more significant than an internal combustion engine vehicle.

The foundation is a conservative think tank that according to 2012 tax filings was funded predominantly by Exxon Mobil, Chevron and the Koch brothers. The organization, according to the New York Times, has been attempting for years to promote fossil fuels while inciting a pullback in America's transition to renewable energy.

The group has campaigned against green energy, and last year an executive at the organization tweeted: "Today, I’m thankful to live a high-carbon lifestyle and wish the rest of the world could too. Energy poverty = poverty. Decarbonization is dangerous and deadly."

The group's report adds up the costs of government subsidies, charging equipment and the added strain on the electric grid, claiming that the "true cost of fueling an EV would equate to an EV owner paying $17.33 per gallon of gasoline."

When ICE owners pay for a gallon of gasoline, the report says, they are paying for the "entire infrastructure to refine, transport and market that gasoline."

"When an EV owner connects to the electric grid, how much are they paying for the extra generation, transmission, and distribution costs that they are imposing on the grid, and will those embedded costs rise over time?"


The report identifies three different areas of hidden EV ownership costs: the first deals with direct subsidies, such as the $7,500 federal tax credit. The second deals with indirect subsidies, notably an avoidance of state and federal fuel taxes.

This, the report says, is problematic as such taxes are used to fund road construction and maintenance; since EVs are heavier than comparable ICE vehicles, EV owners ought to be paying more in fuel taxes, rather than less.

A component of this indirect subsidy deals with the extra costs placed on the electric grid by EVs.

"Generation, transmission, distribution and overhead costs for utilities are all affected by EVs, and it is crucial for the future of the electric grid that EVs charge at times that reduce demand volatility rather than increase it as is often the case today," the report says.

The final category of the foundation's report involves regulatory electrification and emissions mandates.

Combined, the report found that these hidden costs add around $48,000 to the cost of an average model-year 2021 EV over 10 years.

Even with recently slashed prices and tax incentives, the report said, EVs will remain more expensive than their internal-combustion-engine counterparts for years without "increased and sustained government favors."

A key component of EV costs revolves around their battery components. And while EVs are generally a greener solution to travel (depending on the energy makeup of the grid they charge on), the raw materials needed to make their batteries are somewhat problematic.

Both cobalt and lithium have been linked to environmental concerns and human rights issues, according to the Times. Mining cobalt produces hazardous slag that leaches into the surrounding environment; mining lithium uses an enormous amount of groundwater.

Toyota, which remains staunchly committed to hybrids, said in May that the same raw material used for one long-range EV could instead be used to produce 90 hybrids. The overall carbon reduction of those hybrids, according to Toyota, would be 37 times higher than that of a single EV.





So with subsidies the cost equals $13.33 in gas IF you believe a right wing “think tank” funded by petroleum companies. But what would gas itself cost without subsidies? Last I saw the petroleum industry got $7 TRILLION in subsidies Worldwide. I’ve seen several estimates that the true cost of gasoline not counting subsidies would be $15 per gallon.
 
So with subsidies the cost equals $13.33 in gas IF you believe a right wing “think tank” funded by petroleum companies. But what would gas itself cost without subsidies? Last I saw the petroleum industry got $7 TRILLION in subsidies Worldwide. I’ve seen several estimates that the true cost of gasoline not counting subsidies would be $15 per gallon.
Without federal and state taxes applied at the gas pump fuel would be about 75 cents a gallon.
 
If these same people did a study on how much it REALLY costs for gas powered vehicles which would include all the Billions, maybe Trillions of dollars in government subsidies to gas companies, the cost would probably be $100 a gallon. Of course they would need to skew the numbers like they did in this study.
 
If these same people did a study into the TRUE cost to everyone for a gas powered vehicle the cost would probably be $100 a gallon. They would need to skew the numbers and include the Billions or maybe Trillions of Government subsidies the gas companies have received and all the tax breaks.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT