# Another EV hit piece



## Joe90 (7 mo ago)

Got to love these hit pieces

Electric Vehicles Cost More than You Think - The American Conservative


----------



## NR4P (Jul 14, 2018)

The source/title says it all. Another FoxNews like propaganda outlet.


----------



## Maxpilot (Oct 7, 2020)

"There are lies, damed lies and statistics." - Mark Twain


----------



## Klaus-rf (Mar 6, 2019)

NR4P said:


> The source/title says it all. Another FoxNews like propaganda outlet.


AKA Foxaganda to most, Foxigen to the rest.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Please avoid political discussions on this site. The original post and link are fine, but the follow-on comments are over that line and should be avoided.

It would be acceptable (and more useful) to read the article and explain where it is making incorrect assumptions and faulty logic.


----------



## JasonF (Oct 26, 2018)

I'm not willing to dismiss it as "oh well, this is how conservatives think" - because the article is incredibly insulting, even to non conservatives. If I were to summarize it, it's saying that Americans are too stupid to figure out how much they're actually spending on transportation unless they have receipts from a gas station to help them track it. That's a really dumb reason to oppose EV's.


----------



## Klaus-rf (Mar 6, 2019)

It also completely leaves out the ~$60Billion/year in subsidies (tax cuts) to US petrol companies. 'Merikans would riot in the streets (driving around in their flag-waving 8MPG pick-em-up trucks) if they had to pay the real price for petrol.


----------



## bwilson4web (Mar 4, 2019)

Challenge accepted:

"... driving a mid-priced EV about 12,000 miles a year who obtained most of his energy at home paid about $10.34 in fueling costs to drive 100 miles. ..." My 2019 Tesla Model 3 is EPA rated at 25 kWh/100 miles and my local, Huntsville electricity rate is $0.12/kWh. So 25 kWh * $0.12/kWh = $3.00 / 100 miles which is much less than $10,34.
"... those who cannot charge at home—the cost was closer to $14.34 per 100 miles. ..." - so $0.40/kWh on current cross country trip at Lowell AR, $0.40/kWh * 25 kWh = $10.00 per 100 miles which is significantly less than $14.34.
Notice I identified my EV make and model as well as electricity rate per kWh which is more than the original author's article. There are areas where an EV can be more or less expensive than my Tesla.

Bob Wilson


----------



## Jim H (Feb 11, 2017)

bwilson4web said:


> Challenge accepted:
> 
> "... driving a mid-priced EV about 12,000 miles a year who obtained most of his energy at home paid about $10.34 in fueling costs to drive 100 miles. ..." My 2019 Tesla Model 3 is EPA rated at 25 kWh/100 miles and my local, Huntsville electricity rate is $0.12/kWh. So 25 kWh * $0.12/kWh = $3.00 / 100 miles which is much less than $10,34.
> "... those who cannot charge at home—the cost was closer to $14.34 per 100 miles. ..." - so $0.40/kWh on current cross country trip at Lowell AR, $0.40/kWh * 25 kWh = $10.00 per 100 miles which is significantly less than $14.34.
> ...


Good accurate point Bob. My rate at home .10/kWh so I do even better. Add to that Solar and I charge for free. Payback on solar was 6 years, and that was over 11 years ago. 
Author did state he's done a lot of work in Michigan. It's been a few years since I had geography, but I recall Detroit is in Michigan. Author probably does a lot of work for automotive industry. Enough said.


----------



## Joe90 (7 mo ago)

Klaus-rf said:


> It also completely leaves out the ~$60Billion/year in subsidies (tax cuts) to US petrol companies. 'Merikans would riot in the streets (driving around in their flag-waving 8MPG pick-em-up trucks) if they had to pay the real price for petrol.


We also need to add the money spent on Foreign Affairs (and sometimes war) to ensure a constant flow of oil.


----------



## Ace Ranch (8 mo ago)

Driving an EV for a month for $35. This car is charged largely by a 440 acre solar farm just up the road. 
2.5 Billion a day in profits for the global oil industry. SMH


----------



## Klaus-rf (Mar 6, 2019)

^ 
That nearby solar farm didn't get there for free.


----------



## Joe90 (7 mo ago)

Klaus-rf said:


> ^
> That nearby solar farm didn't get there for free.


Everything has a cost. Some cost are defensible, some are not.


----------



## JasonF (Oct 26, 2018)

Joe90 said:


> Everything has a cost. Some cost are defensible, some are not.


You can literally paralyze yourself into inaction by following the costs back far enough. This is what the anti-EV is counting on by pointing out how electricity is generated, what fuels that generation, where lithium and cobalt and copper come from, etc.


----------



## Ace Ranch (8 mo ago)




----------



## Ace Ranch (8 mo ago)

Joe90 said:


> Everything has a cost. Some cost are defensible, some are not.


That nearby solar farm didn't get there for free but the energy it provides is.


----------



## JasonF (Oct 26, 2018)

@Ace Ranch The point is that it's a straw man argument: Because EV's aren't _produced_ with zero pollution, and because all electricity isn't produced without pollution, that means the entire argument about EV's being 'greener' is invalid, and they're as bad as gas cars.

The ones who _really_ go far off the edge are the ones that claim EV's are _worse_ for the environment than gas cars over the car's lifetime.

At any rate, there is no arguing with either of them. They're false logic created by one of two factions: People who either feel that the very existence of EV's means their gas cars will be taken away from them; And those who believe the only environmentally friendly solution is to eliminate all privately owned cars, and EV's are an unnecessary crutch that prevents that solution from coming about.


----------

