Expensive USA EV DC fast charging

I am looking at what my next vehicle might be and a BEV is compelling... and Level 2 home charging would more than fulfill my local driving needs. IIRC fully loaded residential electricity cost here is ~ 15 cents per KWh. The Ford Mustang Mach E with the extended battery I am looking at is rated to consume at about 2.5KWh/mile so driving 200 miles locally would cost ~$12, like driving almost for free.

But then I started looking at road trips and that's where this all falls apart. My usual 1050 mile trip to FL would use ~420KWh in that Mach E. Electrify America fast charge rate is $0.41 per KWh so the trip would cost ~$170 and require at least 4 stops. Compare that to my 2009 Toyota Tacoma, not a particularly efficient vehicle, that gets 21 MPG on the highway... that would use 50 gallons of gas at about $3.50 per gallon for a cost of $175 and require only 2 stress free fuel stops. Now EA has a slightly lower rate ($0.31) for members but that comes with a monthly fee and if you only make one or 2 road trips a year it wouldn't be worth joining. And even that still costs too much, IMO. And regular hybrids like the RAV4 and/or more efficient gasoline cars like a Honda CR/V will actually cost far less to make that same drive than the EV.

So, maybe it's still just me but I see zero advantages and many disadvantages to using EVs for anything except local commuting and daily driving. Unless this pricing dynamic changes I just don't see how we convert over to an electrified fleet anytime soon, other than by mandate. Since there is no cost advantage it sure won't be by choice.

You cannot use facts, logic and reason anymore.

Such behaviors are censored and anyone caught doing them are domestic terrorists.

All joking aside... yeah... the numbers often don't add up for a lot of things.

With ebikes our efficiency is amazing because we weigh next to nothing. But with a big EV that weighs thousands of pounds you need to move that around and that requires a lot of energy.

CO2 is also something that plants crave and when there is more of it the earth gets greener. Millions of years ago dinosaurs roamed the earth because the CO2 levels were three times higher than today and the earth had abundant life that those huge creatures could consume in mass quantities.

My advice is to keep using Critical Thinking as you are doing and watch the crazy stuff being pushed in the official narratives carefully because it tends to give you a clue of what is really going on behind the scenes.

We are fed a sort of Dumbed Down reality publicly.

That being said.. I love my ebike and ride all day for less than a buck.

Choosing a workday commute vehicle based on its road trip ability, towing capacity, rock crawling capability or whatever, seems to be a peculiarly American kind of derangement.

Why not go to work every day in a Boeing 737? Then when you get a long weekend, you can visit the Bahamas with some of your friends.

But most of us can or will only be able to afford and have one vehicle. It would need to do both.. or should I say best fulfill all of one's needs. That is the dilemma.

Chalo said:

Choosing a workday commute vehicle based on its road trip ability, towing capacity, rock crawling capability or whatever, seems to be a peculiarly American kind of derangement.

Why not go to work every day in a Boeing 737? Then when you get a long weekend, you can visit the Bahamas with some of your friends.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry, climate change is real. I just don't see how EVs will change that very much especially since most electricity is generated here by coal, gas and oil. All that would need to be converted simultaneously to carbon free sources to make a real difference. And the costs of fully converting to EVs, I believe, will come as a surprise to many. But I agree with you at least that our e-bikes are fantastic.

SafeDiscDancing said:

CO2 is also something that plants crave and when there is more of it the earth gets greener. Millions of years ago dinosaurs roamed the earth because the CO2 levels were three times higher than today and the earth had abundant life that those huge creatures could consume in mass quantities.


That being said.. I love my ebike and ride all day for less than a buck.

Click to expand...

raylo32 said:

But most of us can or will only be able to afford and have one vehicle. It would need to do both.. or should I say best fulfill all of one's needs. That is the dilemma.

Click to expand...

You don't have to own an expensive tool to do a job you only do a couple times a year. You wouldn't buy a post hole auger for a one time job, then use it to mix pancake batter just because you own it. That's the kind of reasoning being used by people who think they need 500 mile range. But for this reason the electric cars that are being developed and sold are too much tool for the job of toting one lazy moron to work. They're too heavy, too expensive, too wasteful of finite resources.

Stinking gas cars and trucks can be rented pretty much anywhere when you actually need one for something.

raylo32 said:

I'm sorry, climate change is real.

Click to expand...

You want REAL climate change?

Study the Younger Dryas period from 12,900 years ago.

They find all over the earth this "Black Mat" layer which is the charcoal remains of planetary devastation.

The dominant theory now is a comet passed by and left a trail of debris that struck the earth causing massive heating that burned everything on the surface.

At the same time some debris actually struck the ice sheet and threw big chunks of ice back up into the air which then landed somewhere else.

We can study the remains of Mammoths that show evidence of:

- Fire which was intense.
- Violent shock similar to a nuclear bomb blast.
- Instant freezing which shows that ice chunks were also flying around.

This then started the same period we know in historical record as the "Great Flood" which is provable by geology if you know what you are looking for.

--------------------------

It gets better...

Gobekli Tepe is an archaeological site of about 12,000 years ago where an obviously advanced people climbed up a mountain to build their temple complex on high ground.

So we are now starting to understand what really happened.

Humanity was nearly wiped out 12,900 years ago.

But there WAS a global civilization of a higher level of sophistication than the "official narrative" allows.

----------------------

All I'm saying is keep your eyes open and don't accept the bullshit that they feed the public.

Dumb and Dumber is a purposeful control mechanism going back thousands of years.

The ancient Romans based their entire system on "Bread and Circuses" to keep the fools down.

Man, Chalo, you are sometimes a smart guy, but other times not. You just love to jump to unjustified conclusions. The trip I used above as an example was just that, an example. But by far not the only road trip or other utilitarian use I routinely make of my Tacoma. Other road trips, workdays at the farm, loading up the kayak and the dog, etc. I am retired so don't have a long daily commute so I don't need to worry about high local mileage. What I will consider going forward is a PHEV vehicle. Bop around town purely in EV mode, plug in to charge at home, then no worries on the road with the gasoline engine to take over. If Toyota makes a Tacoma PHEV I'll be all over it... that is if the cost doesn't erase any potential fuel savings.

My whole point was that commercial EV charging rates are higher than most people know... perhaps they hadn't thought about that like me, until recently. I had always been of the opinion that this would be the case, however, since we'll end up with a few corporate entities controlling the business and there will be little or no real competition. So, they'll end up charging us at least what we are already paying for fuel.

And watch the PHEV and standard hybrid prices. The manufacturers will do the math and price them such that the cost recovery, if any, will take a looong time.

Chalo said:

raylo32 said:

But most of us can or will only be able to afford and have one vehicle. It would need to do both.. or should I say best fulfill all of one's needs. That is the dilemma.

Click to expand...

You don't have to own an expensive tool to do a job you only do a couple times a year. You wouldn't buy a post hole auger for a one time job, then use it to mix pancake batter just because you own it. That's the kind of reasoning being used by people who think they need 500 mile range. But for this reason the electric cars that are being developed and sold are too much tool for the job of toting one lazy moron to work. They're too heavy, too expensive, too wasteful of finite resources.

Stinking gas cars and trucks can be rented pretty much anywhere when you actually need one for something.

Click to expand...

ODG. LOL. Someone here has been sniffing burning li-ion batteries, it seems.

SafeDiscDancing said:

raylo32 said:

I'm sorry, climate change is real.

Click to expand...

You want REAL climate change?

Click to expand...

I wasn't addressing your specific use case so much as the consumer misconceptions and Walter Mittyism that result in electric cars being as much of an overkill problem as stinking gas cars.

EVs don't lend themselves to daylong trips. The easy answer to that issue is not to use them for that. You can own a short range EV but rent a stinker when you need to make a long drive.

That might make sense for someone but not me. My mix of driving would require far too many rentals. My point is that EVs need to be practical and cost effective for road trips before they will be broadly accepted. As of now we are not on a trajectory to make that happen. Not even close.

Chalo said:

I wasn't addressing your specific use case so much as the consumer misconceptions and Walter Mittyism that result in electric cars being as much of an overkill problem as stinking gas cars.

EVs don't lend themselves to daylong trips. The easy answer to that issue is not to use them for that. You can own a short range EV but rent a stinker when you need to make a long drive.

Click to expand...

raylo32 said:

My point is that EVs need to be practical and cost effective for road trips before they will be broadly accepted. As of now we are not on a trajectory to make that happen. Not even close.

Click to expand...

I suggest that if most people were honest with themselves about how they actually use their cars (rather than how they imagine using their cars), EVs would be more broadly accepted-- and they could be better optimized for their main purpose, rather than being designed for corner cases.

Cars that are too fast, with long range, encourage folks to plan their lives poorly and locate too far from where they go regularly. Then because they're tooled up for excessive driving, they find pretexts to do it more. My hope is that autonomous vehicles can help break us out of the vicious cycle of escalating car dependence and lifestyle madness.

Chalo said:

Then because they're tooled up for excessive driving, they find pretexts to do it more.

Click to expand...

I agree with Chalo on the point that this was all by design. The suburban sprawl was done because at the time the "Robber Barons" were not nearly as rich as they are today.

And no one actually KNEW where oil came from back then.

But since scarcity creates an urgency and raises prices these "Robber Barons" jumped at the idea this was due to dinosaurs decomposing.

Laughable if you really think deeply on it.

While it's still an area with doubts the dominant theory is that bacteria deep in the earth is actually where oil comes from.

Many oil wells that were fully drained decades ago when looked at now have partially refilled.

This means in reality oil is a renewable.

I think as we get a better feel for what the modern "Robber Barons" are plotting we see their moves more clearly.

Evidence is key. Look at the evidence and "think for yourself".

SafeDiscDancing said:

This means in reality oil is a renewable.

Click to expand...

Wow. You are really determined to be wrong about everything, aren't you?

Chalo said:

Wow.

Click to expand...

Like I said... it's being looked at... Wikipedia:

In 1951, the Soviet geologist Nikolai Alexandrovitch Kudryavtsev proposed the modern abiotic hypothesis of petroleum. On the basis of his analysis of the Athabasca Oil Sands in Alberta, Canada, he concluded that no "source rocks" could form the enormous volume of hydrocarbons, and therefore offered abiotic deep petroleum as the most plausible explanation. (Humic coals have since been proposed for the source rocks.) Others who continued Kudryavtsev's work included Petr N. Kropotkin, Vladimir B. Porfir'ev, Emmanuil B. Chekaliuk, Vladilen A. Krayushkin, Georgi E. Boyko, Georgi I. Voitov, Grygori N. Dolenko, Iona V. Greenberg, Nikolai S. Beskrovny, and Victor F. Linetsky.

Astronomer Thomas Gold was a prominent proponent of the abiogenic hypothesis in the West until his death in 2004. More recently, Jack Kenney of Gas Resources Corporation has come to prominence, supported by studies by researchers at the Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) in Stockholm, Sweden.

----------------------

Remember the "Official Narrative" will always serve the "Robber Barons" and not "The People".

So is it the product of magic bacteria as you said before, or is it abiogenic magic like you are saying now?

They make stuff up and say whatever gives them the answer they want. Nothing new to see here. Best to not even engage.

Chalo said:

So is it the product of magic bacteria as you said before, or is it abiogenic magic like you are saying now?

Click to expand...

The real crux is that vehicles let us live larger and more varied lives, some of which worsens the well known issues of pollution, sprawl, and such. Not many of us are willing to live a life that merely fits within e-bike range and capability... or even within current BEV range and charging limits. We'll give that mobility up under protest. Maybe we are sustainable like this, maybe... or more probably... not. But I agree about the excess in our culture... even in EV space where you have things like 800+ HP Rivians and Teslas with Ludicrous mode. Why??

Chalo said:

raylo32 said:

My point is that EVs need to be practical and cost effective for road trips before they will be broadly accepted. As of now we are not on a trajectory to make that happen. Not even close.

Click to expand...

I suggest that if most people were honest with themselves about how they actually use their cars (rather than how they imagine using their cars), EVs would be more broadly accepted-- and they could be better optimized for their main purpose, rather than being designed for corner cases.

Cars that are too fast, with long range, encourage folks to plan their lives poorly and locate too far from where they go regularly. Then because they're tooled up for excessive driving, they find pretexts to do it more. My hope is that autonomous vehicles can help break us out of the vicious cycle of escalating car dependence and lifestyle madness.

Click to expand...

Chalo said:

So is it the product of magic bacteria as you said before, or is it abiogenic magic like you are saying now?

Click to expand...

Abiogenic (from what it seems to mean) is organisms that function without the normal breathing of ordinary biological things.

The point is there are many cases where vast oil reserves are discovered when the geologists know the nearby rocks have no history of biomasses that might have decayed.

"Robber Barons" were the big battle in the 1800's and 1900's.

Tesla was both supported by the "Robber Barons" and also denied by them.

Any time Tesla offered a solution that would essentially "give away" stuff in ways that could not easily be seen to yield a profit he got shut down.

Tesla saw the last era of classical Science die as the math people took over.

Jekyll Island 1911 was a turning point in many areas... a huge leap ahead for the bad guys.

Tesla saw Einstein as a "fuzzy haired crackpot". (true)

LOL... And whatever harebrained theory you are willing to accept it took billions of years to work. Now we are sucking it down and burning it up like the fat kid going through a Golden Corral buffet. Basically in real time.

SafeDiscDancing said:

Chalo said:

So is it the product of magic bacteria as you said before, or is it abiogenic magic like you are saying now?

Click to expand...

Abiogenic (from what it seems to mean) is organisms that function without the normal breathing of ordinary biological things.

The point is there are many cases where vast oil reserves are discovered when the geologists know the nearby rocks have no history of biomasses that might have decayed.

Click to expand...

:lol:

SafeDiscDancing said:

"crackpot". (true)

Click to expand...

raylo32 said:

LOL... And whatever harebrained theory you are willing to accept it took billions of years to work. Now we are sucking it down and burning it up like the fat kid going through a Golden Corral buffet. Basically in real time.

Click to expand...

...And you dont think we are not doing that with materials, copper, Lithium, rare earths, etc for all the electrical equipment, solar systems , inefficient Wind turbines, Battery’s , etc etc.?
We are already in strife for electronic component shortages, and that is just one little political hiccup, so how long before there is a real issue over some vital resource ( copper ?) , depending on who is holding the access to resources.
You are easy to accept those “hairbrained” explanations you have been told about Oil, Coal, CO2, etc... why stop there ?

SafeDiscDancing said:

Abiogenic (from what it seems to mean) is organisms that function without the normal breathing of ordinary biological things.

Click to expand...

I think you mean "anaerobic".

a = not
bio = life
genic = produced by

He probably believes in the immaculate petroleum deposition. Can we say, amen, people?

Chalo said:

SafeDiscDancing said:

Abiogenic (from what it seems to mean) is organisms that function without the normal breathing of ordinary biological things.

Click to expand...

I think you mean "anaerobic".

a = not
bio = life
genic = produced by

Click to expand...

Sure we are. But those things don't cause climate change, at least not directly and not on the same scale. But they certainly do have some CC and other impacts from extraction, processing and recycling for sure.

Hillhater said:

raylo32 said:

LOL... And whatever harebrained theory you are willing to accept it took billions of years to work. Now we are sucking it down and burning it up like the fat kid going through a Golden Corral buffet. Basically in real time.

Click to expand...

...And you dont think we are not doing that with materials, copper, Lithium, rare earths, etc for all the electrical equipment, solar systems , inefficient Wind turbines, Battery’s , etc etc.?
We are already in strife for electronic component shortages, and that is just one little political hiccup, so how long before there is a real issue over some vital resource ( copper ?) , depending on who is holding the access to resources.
You are easy to accept those “hairbrained” explanations you have been told about Oil, Coal, CO2, etc... why stop there ?

Click to expand...