patrick.net

B.A.C.A.H. says

It's because like RWSGFY says, our electric rates are going up faster than the gasoline prices.

Isn't CA testing out taxing EV mileage currently for MFT? Pretty sure I read that somewhere. Said it was coming and I think it's here.

Funny thing is I have a Tesla sitting in my driveway currently sitting next to my Armada. It's a car for babies the Tesla that is. I don't care how fun they are to drive, at 6'3" it ain't for me. I could flop my dick on the roof of the car.... And I don't care how "safe" Tesla says their cars are, if I t-boned the car in my driveway it's toast at 45mph+, you're not living.

It's Solyndra 2.0:



https://nypost.com/2024/06/05/business/democratic-senator-blasts-5b-program-as-failure-after-only-7-ev-charging-stations-open-in-3-years/

Happy Juneteenth EV Fluffers!

Demand Power Charges Are the Achilles Heel of a Nationwide EV Fast Charging Network

Factors that impact DCFC profitability include low utilization percentages (due to the high percentage of home charging and that EVs represent less than 1% of the total US vehicle fleet)….and also high operating costs from demand power charges. Demand power is typically the highest electricity usage during a 15 minute period in a billing cycle and utilities charge a premium for it. By measuring spikes in power demand and charging a higher fee to supply it, a utility is better prepared to deliver electricity under all power demand scenarios and be able to afford to invest in the infrastructure to do so. The cost of demand power at my office location is $3.41 per kW….which is 22 times more than the overall cost of electricity.

The challenges for achieving DCFC profitability might be one reason this country’s largest EV manufacturer fired their entire 500 member charging team. Perhaps it was discovered that this division was an important drain on profitability, and why Wall Street does not appear to recognize its robust charging system as an important source of future profitability.

The cost to construct, operate, and maintain a DCFC station is significantly higher than for a gasoline station. If DCFC stations cannot be operated profitably, what does it mean for the viability of the transition to an electric vehicle world that many are aspiring for.

https://www.realclearenergy.org/articles/2024/06/18/demand_power_chargesthe_achilles_heel_of_a_nationwide_ev_fast_charging_network_1038939.html

For reference: https://www.ampcontrol.io/post/the-ugly-truth-of-demand-charges-and-how-to-save-money

Most people charge at home at night when the car is not in use and the electricity rates are the lowest.

It costs me about $8.00 to fill up my battery each week charging at home. It costs my wife $70 a week filling up her Hyundai at Costco and we drive the same amount of miles.

@socal2 what’s your 1kwh price and battery capacity in kWh units, how many miles does it give per charge, what’s your ice mi/gal
Mine take 100h on regular wall socket which draws about 12A on s3 plaid. Mostly use charge point.

@Blue - I pay $0.13/kWh for Super Off Peak (midnight to 6AM) and (midnight to 2PM on weekends).

My battery is 81kWh and I plug into my existing dryer outlet in the garage which is 220V at 30 amps. So I get about 22 miles/hour hour charge. I typically charge 2 nights a week to stay in the super off peak times keeping the battery between 20 and 80% full.

@socal2, your $.13/KWh makes a big difference, good for you. Down here, pge charges $.42-48 depending on the tier. I have a feeling, can go up even more soon. In terms of the price EVs are not super economical down here. But this doesn’t stop super enthusiasts around who get free charging at work. Based on what I know most places offer 7kw (I read 6 on display, because of the load) for 4 hours max. One has to run around to pull in and out to avoid fines. At best it helps 10 to 20 miles per charge. One has to look for the next 4 hr slot. Most likely one ends up stick around 10 to 12 hr to get two charges. I guess, it’s good for the employer!

socal2 says

It costs my wife $70 a week filling up her Hyundai at Costco and we drive the same amount of miles.

And what was the price difference between the cars? Is it similar sized to your Tesla? $70/wk is kind of a lot for any Hyundai that I know of unless driving 800 miles a week which is unlikely in most scenarios.

I drive a V8 Armada, so shitty gas mileage and I don't even spend $70/wk living 20 miles from the nearest big stores or things I need to do/get. Wife drives a 4 Runner and goes to the gym every morning 20 miles each way and then drives her territories of IL and Wisconsin. I think she even struggles to get $70/wk and she drives a lot more than most.

I don't know if it's a CA thing with gas prices, but in IL ICE is substantially cheaper than an EV based on price alone. I can fuel up for 5 years here before any model of Tesla is a break even. Don't have to charge every night or at work. I can go a week and take 3 minutes to fuel up one time. I know there's a gas station near if running low. There are zero chargers where I'm at.

Not an EV hater as I've driven them before. The economics of them doesn't make sense. This is one of those CA centric things in my opinion and it looks like they're gonna tax you cats as I've been saying. You don't get to use the roads for free. You will be paying more per mile than an ICE vehicle on top of the higher purchase price soon.

I know the green push has nothing to do with your driving a Tesla. You like it. Which is fine. I need to tow 200-350 miles. No EV is remotely close to doing that and I'm talking 3-5k gross weight. Nothing extreme.

I am on a trip to Maryland, DC areas. I get gas for $3.25 at Costco! Still see EVs around. I’d suspect that they might have bought them for non economical reasons like fun, lifestyle etc.

Blue says

socal2, your $.13/KWh makes a big difference, good for you. Down here, pge charges $.42-48 depending on the tier. I have a feeling, can go up even more soon.

I would not recommend getting an EV if you can't charge at home. It's doable to rely on Tesla Superchargers, but it takes away one of the greatest conveniences of driving EV's. California just changed electric rates statewide that screws new solar homes, but locks in and even lowers my hourly rates. I have SDG&E and they have an "EV plan" where they charge higher rates during the day and give you lower rates at night.

I did the math 6 years ago when I got my first EV (Chevy Bolt) and the math worked for me in terms of gas and maintenance savings.

WookieMan says

And what was the price difference between the cars? Is it similar sized to your Tesla? $70/wk is kind of a lot for any Hyundai that I know of unless driving 800 miles a week which is unlikely in most scenarios.

A mid range Hyundai Santa Fe is $38K. Premium Santa Fe's run as high as $51K in SoCal. A new Model Y is $45K.......but there is also a $7,500 federal subsidy that brings the price down to $37,500.

Then I get over $200/month in gas/maintenance savings. The cheapest gas I can get at Costco is $4.55/gallon.

So even without the $7,500 Federal subsidy, the cost of owning/operating a Tesla is less than a mid-range Hyundai after 3 years.

I get it that you are constantly towing and an EV won't work for you, but the MAJORITY of drivers will never tow a thing in their entire lives.

socal2 says

Most people charge at home at night when the car is not in use and the electricity rates are the lowest.

Marie Antionette 'Let them eat cake'.

Most ppl in California are renters.

Of course, my post wasn't even about that. It was about DCFC profitability.

But as usual, socal2 engages in red herrings, whataboutisms and non-sequitors when he doesn't like where the subject is going.

I've been looking at the Ford F150 powerboost. It's a V6 twin turbo with an electric motor in between the engine and the 10 speed transmission. It's also basically a rolling generator with a 3.6 (upgradeable to 7.2) KW inverter. You can crank the AC in a large 3rd wheel for a 3 day weekend and burn 1/3 to 2/3 a tank of gas and it's quiet. It's also way more efficient than the tri-fuel generator I bought last year and only ever so slightly less efficient than a good diesel generator.

Over 600 mile range. 430HP, aluminum body and over 500ft/lbs of torque.

I'm only waiting to hear about the 2025 models before I buy. Rumor is it'll come with a 50KW battery (instead of the small one it has now) that will give it an electric only range of 30 miles in best case conditions.

I can easily putter back and forth to my aging parents house on electric only to check in on them. The build I'm considering is a wee bit over $85K MSRP but I know a place that will sell it to me for 4% below invoice. I think it might qualify for the Federal subsidy (with the larger battery) and they do allow incentive stacking without any BS. This place basically doesn't even have a service center, their business model is to move trucks as fast as possible with the lowest overhead possible.

I think PHEV is the near future vs. fully electric. I think Teslas are numero uno with respect to electric but aren't built very well.

Speaking of shitty builds RAM is out with a PHEV with over 600HP but it's an all electric drive train and they have a jeep V6 onboard as a generator. Again, with a range over 600 miles. But I would never buy a Stellantis vehicle. Rumor is they are fucking up builds on purpose to have an excuse to move production out of the US entirely. Either way they are pieces of shits. Much like my 90s jeep was.

UkraineIsTotallyFucked says

Of course, my post wasn't even about that. It was about DCFC profitability.

Don't believe anyone is arguing that you can save money on fuel/electricity if you have to rely exclusively on DCFC. The Tesla Supercharging prices in California are about the same as a gallon of gas. I only use them for pure convenience or on a long road trip. Over 98% of my charging is done at home.

just_passing_through says

I think PHEV is the near future vs. fully electric.

PHEV's are twice as complex and super expensive. Why bother with a hybrid when you still have to do all the maintenance on a gas engine, oil changes, transmissions and brakes?

The other OEM's simply did not invest in batteries like Tesla has and are stuck with the worst of both worlds.

socal2 says

money on fuel/electricity if you have to rely exclusively on DCFC. The Tesla Supercharging prices in California are about the same as a gallon of gas. I only use them for pure convenience or on a long road trip. Over 98% of my charging is done at home.

AGAIN...you can't keep on subject.

That has nothing to do with the profitability of DCFC charging stations. Nothing.

UkraineIsTotallyFucked says

AGAIN...you can't keep on subject.

That has nothing to do with the profitability of DCFC charging stations. Nothing.

WTF are you talking about?

The thread subject is: *Which is more expensive: charging an electric vehicle or fueling a car with gas?*

I am sharing 6 years of personal experience where I am saving over $200 month on fuel driving an EV and charging at home.

socal2 says

WTF are you talking about?

The thread subject is: *Which is more expensive: charging an electric vehicle or fueling a car with gas?*

I am sharing 6 years of personal experience where I am saving over $200 month on fuel driving an EV and charging at home.

Amazing.

UkraineIsTotallyFucked says

socal2 says

WTF are you talking about?

The thread subject is: *Which is more expensive: charging an electric vehicle or fueling a car with gas?*

I am sharing 6 years of personal experience where I am saving over $200 month on fuel driving an EV and charging at home.

Amazing.

It HAS been amazing driving my Tesla these past years.

So much power, enjoyment and cost savings!

socal2 says

HAS been amazing driving my Tesla these past years.

So much power, enjoyment and cost savings!

So fucking what, Marie Antionette? Totally off topic. Again.

The_Deplorable says

Yeah - that is absurd.

Should have just given the money to Tesla to continue to build out the Supercharger network.

Just like the government should have given Elon Musk money to increase Starlink for rural internet access instead of spending Billions on Fiber Optic.
https://twitter.com/JesseBWatters/status/1803583502174028210

socal2 says

Should have just given the money to Tesla to continue to build out the Supercharger network.

With what team? (Then again, why do I bother. You didn't read this the first time)

UkraineIsTotallyFucked says

The challenges for achieving DCFC profitability might be one reason this country’s largest EV manufacturer fired their entire 500 member charging team. Perhaps it was discovered that this division was an important drain on profitability, and why Wall Street does not appear to recognize its robust charging system as an important source of future profitability.

socal2 says

Just like the government should have given Elon Musk money to increase Starlink for rural internet access instead of spending Billions on Fiber Optic.

What fiber optic? They built out some. A fraction of what is needed.

socal2 says

The_Deplorable says

Yeah - that is absurd.

Should have just given the money to Tesla to continue to build out the Supercharger network.

Just like the government should have given Elon Musk money to increase Starlink for rural internet access instead of spending Billions on Fiber Optic.
https://twitter.com/JesseBWatters/status/1803583502174028210

you think they are incompetent? no, they are intentionally stealing your tax dollars my man. those billions made someone’s business partner very rich.

UkraineIsTotallyFucked says

The challenges for achieving DCFC profitability might be one reason this country’s largest EV manufacturer fired their entire 500 member charging team. Perhaps it was discovered that this division was an important drain on profitability, and why Wall Street does not appear to recognize its robust charging system as an important source of future profitability.

Those 500 got fired with the big 10% cut they did across the board a few weeks ago. They are not abandoning Superchargers, they hired some of the key people back already.

Tesla has never played-up charging revenue from their Supercharger network as anything major in their P&L. It was always understood that it was the price to pay if they were going to mainstream Tesla's and allow for long roadtrips during the early adoption phase.

Since Tesla has DOUBLE the gross margin compared to the rest of the auto industry, Tesla could afford to provide this awesome service as part of the luxury and convenience of driving a Tesla.

As Tesla scales more batteries for onsite storage at Supercharger stations, they can bring their cost of energy down by filling up the batteries at night and selling during peak times. Tesla chargers have also become the standard for Ford, GM, Honda, Mercedes, Volvo, BMW, Hyundai.......where they will be charged a premium to access the Supercharger network which will help with utilization and peak costs.

I've never had to wait on a charge for a Supercharger site. The navigation on the screen tells you the number of stalls open in real time. They have plenty of capacity as more EV's (of all brands) hit the road.

https://www.repairerdrivennews.com/2024/06/17/mckinsey-46-of-u-s-ev-owners-want-to-switch-to-ice-vehicles/

socal2 says

Tesla has never played-up charging revenue from their Supercharger network as anything major in their P&L

Yes. That is why the article I posted said:

Perhaps it was discovered that this division was an important drain on profitability, and why Wall Street does not appear to recognize its robust charging system as an important source of future profitability.

socal2 says

I've never had to wait on a charge for a Supercharger site

SOO WHAT? Has nothing to do with the profitability of them, which is the topic. Just more Tesla Fluffing on your part.

RWSGFY says

Which is more expensive: charging an electric vehicle or fueling a car with gas?

Why does it even matter. The inconvenience of the short range and having to looks for charging stations and all the other problems associated with EVs cancels out the gasoline savings if there really is any.

socal2 says

I've never had to wait on a charge for a Supercharger site.

Me neither because I drive an ICE car

komputodo says

I've never had to wait on a charge for a Supercharger site.

Me neither because I drive an ICE car

I don't have to wait in a long Costco line to fill up every week either like I do with my wife's car. I just plug it when I pull into the garage.

Couldn't be easier or more convenient.

Most of those 46% who want to switch aren't driving Teslas.

Other than maybe Rivian, all the other EV's suck.

socal2 says

Most of those 46% who want to switch aren't driving Teslas.

So fucking what?

1) This isn't the Tesla Fluffer Thread.
2) You have no proof of that. You just made it up.

socal2 says

I've never had to wait on a charge for a Supercharger site. The navigation on the screen tells you the number of stalls open in real time. They have plenty of capacity as more EV's (of all brands) hit the road.

In CA sure. Not the case in most states. Argonne National Laboratories in IL had charging for employees (free) and took their system out due to costs. I personally know an employee there. She's since had her Tesla die on her multiple times and now had to have the electrician come out and install home charging wiring. The car has become a hassle for her.

It's tougher in different states and climate with electric. As I've mention I have a lithium battery golf cart. My charger for that alone was $200. Cheaper Chinese battery was $1,300. I've looked at Tesla chargers for home and quality stuff is over $500. This isn't a dig, but most Tesla owners don't know anything about properly wiring to the panel. 6 gauge wire and 50amp breaker is another $500 easy. If you have to put it in pipe/conduit and the labor thats $1-2k. Assuming financed you're 6 months in the hole just to charge at home. That's not including electric or the cost of the car being higher.

It works in CA. Temperate climate so you're not running the AC every time you drive losing milage. It doesn't work well in at least half the country. The CT deliveries and hype will keep them afloat. But Tesla could go under in 3-5 years with market saturation. I hate predictions, but I'm just not seeing it. Anyone that bought any non-CT model will keep it for a long time. There's a majority of the population that has no interest in charging a car for 30 minutes on a road trip. That's undeniable. The business plan is to dump and run. Hence why Elon is asking for his $56B or whatever it is (agreed to). He knows the ship is sinking and so do the shareholders.

Space X will be his legacy. Tesla will go under. Someone will likely come in and buy up the debt/stocks and keep it going. This is what Musk does. I actually like him, but until you understand his business model people don't get it. Your Tesla will likely be bricked in the next 5 years to generate revenue. Some software update. This is the future. He's following Apple, just with cars.

socal2 says

PHEV's are twice as complex and super expensive. Why bother with a hybrid when you still have to do all the maintenance on a gas engine, oil changes, transmissions and brakes?

Because it's a much better built vehicle not to mention a land yacht that is a rolling generator. It's almost as fast as most teslas. That twin turbo v6 engine is in it's 3rd generation and very reliable. I can do a long road trip and won't have to stop and charge ever.

And I don't have to charge! Although I would if they made it a PHEV and those generally take ~11hrs from a 120 so no problem overnight.

Teslas need a lot of repairs and there aren't a lot of places that can work on them. What are you going to do with that expensive battery in 10 years? My guess it won't just be the cost of replacement and labor but soon pricey disposal fees.

You need to add that into the cost of owning it.

It's also much better looking. Most Teslas to me just look like ugly grocery gitters.

UkraineIsTotallyFucked says

socal2 says

Most of those 46% who want to switch aren't driving Teslas.

So fucking what?

1) This isn't the Tesla Fluffer Thread.
2) You have no proof of that. You just made it up.

Say those 46% got any EV. You get brown outs and power outages across the country. We don't have the capacity for EV's remotely either way. The greentards want solar and wind. We need nukes if this will ever work. I bitch about EV's for multiple reasons, but this is #1. #2 is price. #3 is getting the materials for batteries. #4 is charging locations outside of CA.

We need a massive infrastructure build out of electric production. It's not happening. Nukes take 5 years to build. We need probably 20 more nuke sites. Hydro is problematic because of environmental "stuff." Solar and wind need storage when they're not producing which is massively expensive.

I don't see a future for EV's without massive nuke build out. Otherwise it's coal and that defeats the point of going EV if you give a shit about CO2 (I don't) which grows plants and produces oxygen. I kind of like breathing.

WookieMan says

Temperate climate so you're not running the AC every time you drive losing milage.

One of the many nice things I haven't mentioned about that truck is the AC is run from the battery. So you can sit parked with the engine off and run it. When the battery gets low the engine kicks on for a minute or two to recharge it.

Also, the interior isn't ugly with an ugly rotated computer screen like a Tesla it's very functional. The gear shift folds down automatically and you can unfold the padded armrest into a work surface. I can sit in a parking lot with the AC on with the engine turned off and read patnet memes from my laptop on basically a table.

With room left for a burger, fries and coke.