Featured 2023 Prius Prime PHEV debuts with 220-hp engine and 40-mile EV range

Gokhan - you expressed a puzzle that is often not acknowledged - In many areas of our country it is a considerable cost up to drive on electric. Also, when you add the cost up for an all-electric vehicle it is just not economically sensible to go this route in many areas of our country.

I don't think the solution is to punish people who can't afford this by raising the cost of gas or banning gas cars. Nor would I agree with artificially subsidizing this transition to electric based transportation only to reveal the true cost to consumers down the line years later.

I wish there was an easy answer.

In our area electricity is very cheap and there is a real life economic benefit from driving on electric rather than gas. Our area in many cases uses dirty energy sources which are abundant and cheap to generate electricity which probably cost money down the line in environmental and health consequences.

Energy availably and affordability like so many things in life is an imperfect trade off .

 

what if we're not paying the true cost of gas?

it is interesting that many of us phev drivers pay more for electricity than gas, and yet we do everything in our power not to have the engine come on

 

There was a little mixing of 2019 and current prices. For accuracy

• Get a free Tesla.com account and look at the used models.
• Tesla does take trade-in which avoided some sales tax.

There are 3d party resellers but some have sold questionable vehicles. A private sale may be able to transfer FSD. After the first year, battery degradation rate tapers down.

Bob Wilson

 

I completely agree with what you said. As I live in an area where the electricity rate is high. High enough such that until very recently, (beginning of 2022) when the gas price hit above $3/gal, it was cheaper to drive my PP on an engine on HEV mode than on electricity alone. Right now, it has reversed in favor of electricity but not by much. Currently, my operation cost is $0.049/mile for EV and $0.062/mile for HV on my current 2021 PP. Just for comparison, when the gas price was cheap, the cost was $0.047/mile for EV and $0.034/mile for HV on my previous 2020 PP.

In addition to the high rate of electricity, the problem with inadequate charging infrastructures makes it impossible for me to have a BEV as a single transportation method. Yes, I can get one BEV for most in-town use, but I absolutely have to have another car for longer trips I frequently make.

As for the economic and environmental issues of the automobile. The bottom line for many is affordability. If a BEV is not affordable to purchase and operate, then it will not get widely accepted. I for one, would not be able to switch to a BEV as long as the new car cost above $40K. While the subsidy may not be the best solution, as long as the policy is set to use .gov money that way, I will take full advantage of such a subsidy. That is why my next car, either PHEV or BEV is not going to be made by Toyota.

Yeah, the all-new Prius Prime looks cool... but I just know it will not be as cheap as my current 2021 Prius Prime.

 

The trade in value for a Prius Prius of Bob's Model 3's vintage is lower than the Tesal, and the Prime he had was a year older.

Some BEVs had some steep depreciation early on when subsidies was lowering the effective price for new. Then there was the effect decreasing cost for batteries lowering the new prices. Tesla's though have been exception though, and holding their value well.

Macroeconomics is at play for EVs now. There is a small supply compared to demand, which driving prices up. As more factories for EVs and their components come online, we will see the arrival of more affordable models.

It is easier the regulation and monitor emissions at a few hundred power plants than for millions of cars, and dirty power plants aren't in every neighborhood. EVs need to be powered by old, inefficient coal plants to be bested by standard ICE cars.

The poor always get shafted. If the powers that be hadn't dragged their feet on, or simply ignored, the issues of global warming, the required changes could have been done more gradually to lessen the impact.

 

it's about 4 fold worse than that. our politicians game the system by giving away fake money for EV incentives - simultaneously while forcing the cost of gas and Diesel upward by shutting down Pipelines supplies and such - commercial vehicle users will simply pass on the cost to us the consumer. but now the dollar is worth way less, and this type of deflated/devalue dollar - coupled with higher cost for transportation hits, and then continue to hit in other manners - such as the higher cost for fossil fuels that drive the electric generators that make the electric car more expensive to drive.

 

I sure don't see any $10k Teslas. How about a 98k 2019 Model 3 asking $42k Most '19s are $35k-40k and they didn't cost $0k to begin with.

 

I won't charge when electricity rates cost more than gas. That's why I almost never use public chargers. I burn dead dinosaurs in that case.

That's how I know NOBODY who claims to be serious about making a transition to EV cars is serious about the cause of pollution or the climate. If they were serious all they'd have to do is focus on making it significantly less expensive than gas and the rest would fall into place without so much as a single piece of legislation. Instead, they work to make it more expensive than gas and then paper over their corruption by simply outlawing the more economical options. All that money's going somewhere and you can bet your butt it's not to you or me.

 

There is a political forum.

How are they making it more expensive than gas?

 

In 2016 I benchmarked our BMW I3-REx between Huntsville and Nashville:

• $24 electric cost using Electrify America. Also added about 20 miles to the normal 112 mi trip diverting to Manchester.
• $6 premium gas, COSTCO

Around town, the $0.12/kWh made EV the winner because there was no ICE warmup cost.

Bob Wilson

 

Apparently Tesla demand is collapsing:
Tesla plunges in recent Kelly Blue Book report, counter to strong Q3 sales

Tesla fell in Kelly Blue Book’s most recent Q3 analysis report, yet the results contradict Tesla’s actual Q3 sales volume.​

Kelly Blue Book’s (KBB) recent Q3 report is not as cut and dry as it first appears. The report states that “shopping for Tesla plunged in the third quarter,” most luxury buyers instead looked to BMW, which dominated the segment. Yet, with sales data from both companies contradicting KBB’s results, conclusions are confounding.​

FYI, my Tesla is not for sale. Apparently many other low production EVs are in short supply.

Bob Wilson

 

As someone who has done some policy work in electric utility cost structure and environmental impact in a previous life, I want to just note a couple things on the cheap dirty, clean expensive assumption.

First, there are quite a number of factors that go into regional and even individual utility rate structures, and fuel source is actually not directly the biggest factor often. For instance, stranded investment. As regulated monopolies, rates are approved on the general rule that the utility is entitled to a reasonable return on investment. If a region or utility has a lot of underused, costly, older generation sources (e.g., an older nuclear power plant, less efficient and dirty peak power plants) the rates will be set to allow them to keep getting a positive return on the sunk capital. There is some reduction for bad investment choices, but there is a built in inertia to the rate setting process that limits how much the utility eats poor previous capital investments in production.

Second, managing the grid & transmission in certain areas is more costly than others. A poorly designed regional grid with lots of complexity due to factors like the type of use in the region, rules on independent and non-regulated suppliers having access to the grid or even directly to the consumer but the regulated utility gets a cut for managing the transmission and grid, etc. is going to have higher costs compared to a less complex system. Relative age of the grid infrastructure and need to invest in upgrades is another factor. One of the cases where this is best seen is in the wildfire impact that hit PG&E and drove them into bankruptcy. And, you would not be surprised that HI and AK have the highest electric costs due to the unique challenges of managing transmission and the grid in those locations.

Third, the dirtier fuel sources are no longer cheaper (or not by much in some cases). One of the reason coal is on the decline is that natural gas generation is cheaper (capital and fuel - & for C emissions, natural gas is much less of an emitter per MWh). The other is capital cost. Building new coal generation plants is much more expensive than natural gas, oil, co-generation, utility-scale Solar, and onshore wind. It is a bit more expensive than conventional hydro and geothermal (there is not much call for big hydro projects for non-climate environmental reasons). Only offshore wind and advanced nuclear is more costly to build. Some of the reason is the expense of the NOx and SOx emission controls now required. Also, oil and natural gas is heavily subsidized through tax policy.

Fourth, new production is more expensive than old sunk capital, as the costs are basically fuel and maintenance in the later instance. See the underused sunk capital rate structure to see how this is also subsidized in the rate structuring based on capital costs rather than production. But in areas with rapidly growing demand, the utilities and independent producers are having to invest in new production and transmission. That is often the biggest component of cost in electric utility rates. CA and other high-population and economic growth areas are going to have higher rates than more stable areas (i.e., the midwest).

When you look at fuel costs, you get wind & solar at basically zero, hydro & geothermal being not much higher, then nuclear just a tad above that. After that, you get a leap in fuel costs when you move to the fossil fuels (co-gen can vary but is generally closer to the cheap fuel sources) and bio-mass. And, you have the whole potential for cut-offs in supply and wide swings in prices in the fossil fuels.

Bottom line, if you are in a stable/low growth area of the U.S. where wind is widely available, and there is a steady switch from retiring coal for wind production, and there isn't a complicated regulatory structure pushing consumer choice to independent providers or requirements to buy independent generators, you will have much, much cheaper electricity rates generally. If you have a complex grid with multiple independent producers, fast growth and need for new capacity, transmission and grid challenges, you will have much higher costs. The fuel source is not the biggest factor, but it is a factor.

I live where the utility is majority wind (62%), 23% coal, 11% natural gas, and 4% nuclear, we don't have a complex system for independent producers, and are not exactly the high-growth part of the country, we pay about $10.50 per KWh (about 25% below the national average). It is also relatively cleaner due to our very high wind production. Where there is new capacity going in, it is often wind farms selling to other areas, and our utility just steadily builds wind capacity while it retires its Old Dirty baseline coal plants.

WA, with it's already build hydro is dirt cheap. CA with its rooftop solar (good in many ways, but costly for the utility in several ways including demand-side management of the grid), rapid growth, fire issue for transmission, and peculiarities in its grid relative to neighboring grids in the region that they work with to ensure reliable service, has all the issues that would make it much more expensive despite its move towards cleaner sources (it is: last I checked the average cost is about $19.25-50 per KWh).

I've been out of the policy area for a while, although I keep some eye on what's going on, so I may not be up-to-date on all recent changes or developments, but that should give a primer on why dirty sources aren't necessarily cheap, cleaner sources aren't necessarily more expensive (usually they are much less), and why consumers face a wide range of electricity rates.

 

I have to disagree. I live in the San Francisco Bay area, a nice little metropolis of about 45x75 miles. If you discount using the car for commercial purposes and for long distance commuting, daily usage for most people (per a recent study) is 30 miles a day or less. If you can access a 220v charger for a couple hours throughout the day you can easily boost your daily range to 60 miles or more. That's what I do. I charge at night, then when I finish running each errand I plug it back in to top it off again.

 

When pulling into (or out of) a driveway which is high, always go at an angle, not straight on. That way you avoid scraping.

 

Never thought of this. Today my insomnia paid off. Thanks.

 

Whatever savings you gained by running on pure electricity in a Tesla is wiped out on a battery replacement, unless you plan on dumping it on some poor sucker before that happens.

Until the cost of a battery pack replacement in a BEV comes down drastically, hybrids will remain in a good position.

 

Great ... so when the plug-in hybrid gives out - now you have to replace a battery pack AND the ice. great compromise. In stead - maybe look at all the different optios afailable for EV battery replacement (as well ad PHEV's) once someone hits that $200,000 number .... whether the original owner or secondary owner. Oh - alternatively - don't give such a big grain of salt to the oil industries' FUD.
Equally ironic - when a buyer of a $200,000 mile ice makes a purchase, everybody understands the buyer knows what they are likely in for. but when it's a plug-in? all of a sudden it's a crime. Find a better alabi for electric car hatred perhaps.
.

 

What exactly is the failure rate of Tesla batteries? The typical capacity loss seems to pass Toyota's battery warranty.

Of course, the replacement cost of the Prius battery was also going to wipe out the gas savings back when I bought a 2005. Let's see the Hummer 2 is no longer sold. Is there 'research' showing how a Sequoia, Expedition, Tahoe, etc. is better than a Tesla or bZ4X?

 

Hmm. So a reasonably rapid buildout of the grid to support BEV's is going to be more expensive for everyone but way more so for some than others. And green energy doesn't guarantee cost savings. Very interesting explanations and insights, thx.

I bought a used 2012 1.5L ICE & EV motor for a CRZ and had it shipped to my door for $325 including shipping simply due to supply and demand. Hybrid ICE are VERY reliable.

My guess is used BEV battery packs are expensive because A) they are very expensive to begin with and B) due to demand for other uses.

https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_nkw=tesla+battery+packs&_sacat=0&_sop=16