Someone stop me from going all-electric

Because ... ?

FYI, PV panels are end of life after about 30 years, but lose ~ 1% per year of capacity.
Look at this simple spreadsheet: PV Production - Google Sheets

 

I don't know what 'marginal' cost means in this context, but why in the world would total cost not be relevant ?

Notice the second word in "opportunity cost."

 

I thought about the enviro standpoint a bit more, and have recalculated.
Compared to my previous analysis I did not include the processing of oil into petrol for the Prius because I ignore fracking for NG, and I took the (in)efficiency of the MB car into account. So now the numbers look like this:

----
Prius
50 miles per gallon
33.4 kWh of fossil fuel energy per gallon
So 33,400/50 = 668 Wh per mile of oil energy

MB EV
400 Wh per mile of NG fuel at the wheel
0.4 Thermo conversion at the plant, so 1000 Wh per mile from the plant
NG has 50% the carbon footprint as oil, so 500 Wh per mile oil equivalent

75k miles driven
MB emits 0.5 kWh * 75,000 = 37500 kWh oil equivalents
Prius emits 0.668 kWh * 75,000 = 50100 kWh oil equivalents

12,500 kWh carbon emissions saved by driving an MB rather than a Prius
One kW of PV saves 25*1,750 = 43,750 kWh over its lifetime
12,500/43,750 = 0.286

If one kW costs $2500 to install, 0.286 kW costs $715
Summary: A Prius + $715 of PV equals the enviro benefit of an MB

This analysis is heavily biased towards the MB because an EV is very unlikely to have the life of a Prius.

 

CO2? afaik, CO2 is just one element of 'environmental'. One of our co-workers back yard is the freeway sound barrier. He literally has to change his hepa filter daily. That's just particulate ... doesn't account for any of the other harmful respiratory chemicals that get spewed. And is it just environmental? or might fossil fuel be finite ... and maybe we ought to think about how many countries we have to keep a trillion dollar military machine in .... you know to prop up our finite interests in other countries ... assuring we never go off the U.S. petro dollar. Just sayin' ... it ain't just CO2 imo, that makes plug-ins important.

not sure I understand - why wouldn't one want to factor, at least to SOME degree, the potential environmental damage to the ever dwindling underground water supply via fracking ...
That impact, what ever one wants to assign to it - (natural gas to hydrogen ... electricity generation ... CNG cars etc) has an affect on both sides. Unless, it's discounted because one realized how short lived the experts now claim fracking sources are going to be ... maybe 10 years if we're lucky, and conserve ... oh wait ... that's out of the question.

.

 

Go ahead, tell me about all those particulate spewing Prii.

And regarding the military cost, I have a question for you: What would reduce oil dependency more, a $10k tax subsidy that replaces a Prius with one EV, or $2k tax subsidies that replace five ~ 25 mpg conventional cars with 50 mpg Prii ?

 

or an equally imponderable question ... instead of 25mpg conventional car - how much dependency is reduced if we replace the thousands of 0.6mpg Abrams tanks continually replaced on average prior to age 4 - and keep the 25mpg cars instead.
As for ev's - ours is fuelled off 7yr old, fully amortized pv, that still leave a small surplus for the grid, even after all household use is accounted for.
A huge % of ev / phev drivers either have, or are planning for pv. So, the 'clean' difference between an ev fueled via pv/wind, versus a conventional hybrid? Isn't that difference .... Infinite? including CO2?
Our PV production has dropped about 4% (little less) over 7 years btw. Do you think a country that put man on the moon, much less, military might around the world, that we might be able to use some of that HUGE budget towards providing more stable energy? Gotta start somewhere .... chicken or egg.
.

 

^^ The only point I wished to make is that buying an EV has an opportunity cost that is much greater than PV.
And thus EV as an environmental choice is a relatively poor one.

It is obvious. Deal with it.

 

What? Attempt To Charge Nissan LEAF After Hours Ends With Owner Pepper Sprayed And Tackled By Police (w/video)

Search for "nissan leaf driver arrested" | Inside EVs

 

This is an old story, and the police are vindictive morons.

"Mr. Kamooneh was taking lessons himself."

Oh No! Someone is Decatur was exercising!
After school hours. And stealing a kW.

 

The first story happened about 5 days ago, but the second is more than 12 months.

 

Ah, you mean the police pulled this same stunt again ?!

Translated: the police are too stupid to realize that the theft amounted to pennies, and they cared a whole lot more that the dark-skinned person gave the officer some lip.

 

I think you are wasting your time. EV proponents have irrational attachment and cannot be persuaded by logic. Do not waste your time telling groom the bride is fat, ugly, has one eye and horrific personality ymmv

 

I'd say most ev proponents are very rational.
As to the question, it is a fallacious one, as those are not the choices.

Of the few hundred ev owners polled, only about 20% of them replaced any type of hybrid, about the same number of truck/SUVs were replaced as hybrids..

Many others replaced sport/luxury vehicles.

The question also assumes that a $2000 tax credit would result in more sales of hybrids. I don't believe that is true. Hybrids haven't gotten past 4% sales at any point, even when they had the rebates. Sure, you would get some additional sales, but not 5 times as many sales as a $7500 rebate on EVs.

Thinking long term, many people that try hybrids don't stick with hybrids. So any sales bump you get will be short lived,
People that try electrics are much more likely to stick with electrics. Leading to fuel savings for the long term.

 

It has been shown that EVs as a class of vehicles are problematic and not necessarily good for environment. CO2? in majority states (except for west coast and a couple more) EV spit as much or more pollution than hybrid. They are inflexible, have limited range, long charge time, cost more to buy and in many cases more to fuel. At my locale gas would have to go over $3.10 to make EV fueling equal to Prius.

Yet when confronted with reality EV proponents get in denial mode.. what exactly is rational here?

Do you have any statistics to back it up? Our personal experiences may differ you know. Several dozens of Prius owners I know still driving Prii, and the only Leaf owner I knew got rid of it in less then a year.

here is a fundamental problem: hybrids are not a "new class of vehicles" like EV, FCEV or motorcycles. They are just very efficient conventional vehicles.

 

Problematic?
For some, they certainly can be, and for those I would not recommend them.
For many though, they are far less problematic than cars that use an ICE.

I've owned both, and have experienced life with both. For our family, EVs are far, far more convenient and safe.

As for stagnant market share and repeat buyers...
The market share has not kept pace with the number of models being offered. The Prius is the king of hybrids, but they can't keep up the market share all on their own.
Hybrid cars losing market share

As for repeat hybrid buyers, this is a few years old, however I don't believe the trend has changed, especially with lower gas prices and a long-in-the-tooth Prius model.
Hybrid cars: Only 35% of hybrid-car owners buy another one, Polk says - latimes

You raise a very good point that EVs are a new class of vehicle, in that they require different behaviors from their owners. This is a challenge, however it certainly doesn't mean they can't succeed.
If everything that required a change in behavior was rejected, the Wheel never would have caught on.

While this is a bigger change, plugins are catching on faster than hybrids did, and I expect that to continue.

 

Probably right.

Personally, I love EVs as cars.
I just do not delude myself into believing that they are inexpensive or a smart Enviro or oil dependency choice compared to Prius+PV, or more Prii, if the same amount of money or subsidy is spent, respectively.

 

Park is closed, police asked subject to leave, subject didn't, police try to issue citation. Subject refuses to cooperate, police move in to arrest, subject gets physical, police spray and subdue to place subject under arrest.

Bottom line: subject was givened multiple opportunities to work with the police, but, for whatever reasons, chose to become combative.

Subject is an idiot.

End of story

DBCassidy

 

another reason not to have free charging.

 

can't delude yourself , even after my example scenario post above - of zero anytype refuel pollutants / anytype commute pollutants. Help me understand that.

maybe help me deal with the obvious, or at least discern what all that's supposed to mean ... because i'm missing it ... an ev is a greater opportunity cost than pv? And therefore ev's are poor environmental choices? How's that? and even if so - if your costs are greater w/out either, then how can opportunity costs even play into it. The pv array is cash - paid off ... the ev is cash paid off .... both continue to benefit us via virtually no cost for transportation and home energy, which is way more than we'd be paying otherwise . The pv lasts for decades, virtually maintenance free - & ev's (at least) are proving to pretty much only need tires & wipers during the 1st 120k miles.
How do you make relevant, opportunity costs between both ev & pv, if you have both? After a hypothetical 1st decade (120k miles) of owning both pv & ev, maybe you need a new traction pack for the ev. Pretty much nothing for the pv maintenance. Then factor (in comparison) a PHEV's 10yr/120k miles of gas/oil/maintenance, & then the replacement pack .... maybe its inverter rebuilt ... whatever ... and that doesn't even take into account the plugin or phev's pollution - albeit small amounts. That comparison is supposed to be a glaring disadvantage to the ..... which one ... what am I missing.
.

 

I think it's questionable to compare the 2nd most inefficient EV (which is also pretty expensive) to the 2nd most efficient hybrid which is fairly inexpensive. Either way, you're comparing PV with a 25 year lifespan to a car with a 10+ year lifespan, and that's ultimately not going to look good for the car.

Lets say you look at a used 2012 i-miev versus used 2012 Prius. A gallon of gas produces ~20lbs of CO2, so a Prius is at ~.4lb/mile of CO2. CA requires ~.5lb of Carbon per kWh of electricity, and with the i at ~.3kWh/mile, that's ~.15lb/mile of CO2. This puts a Prius in the hole by ~.25lb/mile of CO2.

At 12k miles/year, this is ~3k lbs of CO2. According to PVWatts, in metro socal, 1kW of solar generates ~1500kWh/year of electricity, which is ~.75k lbs of CO2. Lets say the solar array lasts twice as long as the EV or hybrid, which puts it's yearly equivalent at ~1.5k lbs of CO2. A used 2012 Prius still requires ~$5k worth of PV to bring your total emissions per mile down to that of a 2012 i.

With all of that said, binary comparisons like this are a bit disingenuous because the lowest cost/lowest carbon option with the most utility is probably a inexpensive used EV for daily driving, an inexpensive hybrid for longer trips, and updates at home (PV, solar hot water, weather proofing, etc...) to reduce the Carbon footprint there. In terms of lifespan, I remember when people said hybrids wouldn't have the lifespan of conventional vehicles, and they were wrong. I can envision a similar situation with EVs, especially when I can get a brand new battery for a used Leaf for something like $5500.