Running costs of EV's?

your biggest issue is the type of driving. that diesel figure drops like a lead balloon around town, and ev goes up on the highway. everyone has to plug in their personal/regional info. and that's not even taking into account the cost of breathing diesel fumes.

 

now that we solved that, let's tackle the electrical production fuels.

 

we have plenty of gas, the coal is a political thing i believe.

 

i think it would benefit everyone to get off coal (except the coal magnates) and retrain the miners to a life giving profession. farming for instance.

 

Overall, coal and natural gas are the same amount for electric production in the US. Both make up a third, which is followed by nuclear as the next biggest source.
What is U.S. electricity generation by energy source? - FAQ - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

Coal is dropping here. Either through legal action or rising operation costs, the old plants will shut down, and new natural gas is cheaper to build than new coal.

 

Inside EVs: Driving electric is Cheaper than gas in all US states.
This is, of course, generalized view of averages.

Driving Electric Is Cheaper Than Gas In All 50 U.S. States

 

well, that map is a bit pro-EV...they are saying EV cheaper than an average 25 MPG car, not a Prius. Longer discussion elsewhere here. Not to mention taxes higher on gaso.

 

Yes, as I said: generalized view of averages.

 

Yes we are under $2/gallon in some spots and lower by my guess for Feb_2017. So a 50 MPG Prius cannot be beat in many states. However, Plug_in advocates like to compare to 25 MPG average US car. Meanwhile advocates use hypothetical best possible Kwhrs efficiency for BEV, since BEV has a public relations advantage in that the actual amount of electrons used to charge BEV's is not accurately measured, so that leaves room for claims of superb BEV efficiency in all weather conditions. Ask me if I believe it.

 

The efficiency of coal power plants (or really any power plant) could be doubled if the hot water from the plants would be exported to nearby houses and businesses instead of being dumped in the river.

The winter stench from individual houses could be eliminated but no political will to do it here in the USA .

Our local powerplant is surrounded by nearly 1000 homes, 5 large industrial companies, a mall and dozens of individual stores in a 10 mile radius.

All have city sewer water and have been built in the last decade or two.
Three pipes instead of two to make it happen (or two water pipes instead of 1 water and natural gas pipe)

Imagine if we lived in a world where we efficiently use resources?
Too bad only Europe re-uses waste heat.

 

Yes CoGen can make great sense, but we don't do too much in the USA. We do some however, especially in industry areas.

Normally CoGen requires a smallish power plant, because there so much waste heat, there is no place to put it, if you have a big power plant. U.S. Utilities normally want to build the world's largest power plants, for profit maximization, so therein lies the rub. For me, smaller is better, but that means more smaller plants all over the pace. Heading in that direction with solar/wind.

 

The bold type is simply wrong. Most advocates use a rounded 3miles/kWh or use the EPA kWh/100 Miles value which is the power from the wall, not the battery.

And why wouldn't you compare against the average car when trying to talk about nationwide numbers rather than a best case?
True, this doesn't give specific info, but it isn't supposed to. It is a generalization.
If you want more specific info, use a study such as the State Of Charge report by the Union of Concerned Scientists.

If you want information on your specific case, compare your fuel efficiency in your car to the efficiency rating you get in a specific EV, charged using a specific EVSE, at the rate you charge it, and driven as efficiently as you drive.
That information will never be in a report, and expecting it to be is rather futile.

 

It is what that steam pipe that blew in NYC was used for

The Union of Concerned Scientists used the efficiency of the Leaf and Model S, which were the big sellers at the time of the "Cradle to Grave" report. For average car fuel economy they used 29mpg, which includes the Prius family. Trucks and SUVs were left out, because there wasn't a BEV version available at the time. It uses EPA ratings. While this means we don't see the hit EVs take in freezing temps, also don't see the not as bad hit ICE cars take in the same conditions.


Electric Vehicles: Just How Green Are They? | Union of Concerned Scientists
Life Cycle Electric Vehicle Emissions (2015) | Union of Concerned Scientists

A redo with cars available now would be nice to see, but I expect it will get worse for the ICEs. The efficiency loss of the Model X to an average will be balanced by the addition of the i3. Then the ICE mpg average will drop from the addition of those SUVs.