EV vs ICE

[EbS-P]

And hybrids (i.e. ICE engines) are most reliable - despite the arguments about # of parts in the drivetrain.
Suggests that ICE engines have developed so well over the decades (century...) that they still beat electric motors (despite a similar length of development).
Or (more likely) that most EV design teams had not enough knowledge of car design beyond the engine (see your trouble with suspension etc., not the electric motors).

Hybrids are more reliable than ICE probably because Toyota and Honda are dominant in that sector. It’s seems not to be motor and battery issues. It’s everything else.

What we are seeing now is that it takes a few years to get it all right. And we already knew that. It took Toyota a while to learn how to make cars more reliable than the competition.

My takeaways is any 2023 or newer Model 3 and Y has the cheapest ownership cost for the next 7 years.

Oh and the control arms I replaced Jan 24 for replaced 372 days later 10k miles. New independent shoe has a 3 year 30k parts and labor warranty Tesla wouldn’t do a thing for despite being at Tesla 40 days ago and being asked to check the front suspension. He also said all the Teslas control arms are failing at higher rates than anything he’s seen. So much so that he had parts in stock for mine.

 

[DBoon]

EVs are 80% more problematic over the last 3 years.

Basically zero problems with my Bolt after 140,000 miles. Yes, I did have the battery replaced as part of the recall (and happy to get the 65 kWh replacement for the 60 kWh original), but there was no loss of range at 75,000 (end of first battery) and no loss of range with new battery (at this point).

What I've replaced on my Bolt in 140,000 miles: a couple sets of all-season tires, a set of snow tires. Will need a new set of all-seasons this spring, probably a new set of snows in the fall. I've replaced windshield wiper blades. I've added windshield wiper fluid. Hmmmm...can't think of anything else.

What has failed that I haven't bothered fixing - rear view mirror camera (I can live without it for the $1500 cost to replace) and tire pressure sensors (I can measure my pressure with a gauge every few weeks, like I did forever before this and my last car). Plus, it pisses me off that my tire pressure sensors can't report pressure values to my dashboard but somehow these same values get reported to GM via OnStar and sent to me in an email every month. Go figure.

Insurance costs are a wash (same before EV and after EV).

I had calculated a full payback of the EV premium over an equivalently equipped gas car of 80,000 miles due to savings on gas and maintenance. I'm definitely ahead at this point. Just oil changes (16 total, every 5000 miles) would have been over $1000, plus brake pads, rotors, probably calipers by now, etc. etc. Then about now probably muffler system ($800) would be rusting out, cat converter between 150,000 and 200,000 miles would need replacement ($1500 nowadays?), and probably some other random thing (fuel pump, water pump, electronic ignition assembly and/or wires, fuel injection system gumout treatment) by 250,000 miles. All while paying $1300 a year in gas instead of $500 a year in electricity (that I prepaid with my solar PV system back in 2015 or so).

I routinely kept cars to 250,000 to 300,000 miles (mostly highway driving) and have generally needed some of all of those repairs by that point. Can't seen needing any of that with my EV. Maybe I'll have to get new struts or something in the next 50,000 miles?

So far it's been a pretty sweet deal. Glad I didn't buy a Tesla, based on the stories I hear.

 

[EbS-P]

Basically zero problems with my Bolt after 140,000 miles. Yes, I did have the battery replaced as part of the recall (and happy to get the 65 kWh replacement for the 60 kWh original), but there was no loss of range at 75,000 (end of first battery) and no loss of range with new battery (at this point).

What I've replaced on my Bolt in 140,000 miles: a couple sets of all-season tires, a set of snow tires. Will need a new set of all-seasons this spring, probably a new set of snows in the fall. I've replaced windshield wiper blades. I've added windshield wiper fluid. Hmmmm...can't think of anything else.

What has failed that I haven't bothered fixing - rear view mirror camera (I can live without it for the $1500 cost to replace) and tire pressure sensors (I can measure my pressure with a gauge every few weeks, like I did forever before this and my last car). Plus, it pisses me off that my tire pressure sensors can't report pressure values to my dashboard but somehow these same values get reported to GM via OnStar and sent to me in an email every month. Go figure.

Insurance costs are a wash (same before EV and after EV).

I had calculated a full payback of the EV premium over an equivalently equipped gas car of 80,000 miles due to savings on gas and maintenance. I'm definitely ahead at this point. Just oil changes (16 total, every 5000 miles) would have been over $1000, plus brake pads, rotors, probably calipers by now, etc. etc. Then about now probably muffler system ($800) would be rusting out, cat converter between 150,000 and 200,000 miles would need replacement ($1500 nowadays?), and probably some other random thing (fuel pump, water pump, electronic ignition assembly and/or wires, fuel injection system gumout treatment) by 250,000 miles. All while paying $1300 a year in gas instead of $500 a year in electricity (that I prepaid with my solar PV system back in 2015 or so).

I routinely kept cars to 250,000 to 300,000 miles (mostly highway driving) and have generally needed some of all of those repairs by that point. Can't seen needing any of that with my EV. Maybe I'll have to get new struts or something in the next 50,000 miles?

So far it's been a pretty sweet deal. Glad I didn't buy a Tesla, based on the stories I hear.

I want to know if the stats are normalized to the sales numbers. Tesla selling so many bad cars for so long could be driving the statistics. Or each one of those things that doesn’t bother you could be reported as an issue. Those issues don’t differentiate between major items and minor. CR prob has the stats.

 

[woodgeek]

Global average electricity consumption growth is probably misleading. The top 10-15% probably skew that considerably.

are you in favor of more deregulation of electricity generation and transmission?

Its canonical that electrical utilities are 'natural monopolies' and thus need regulation and close supervision. I am certain that the existing PUC system creates bizarre incentives for the generation and distribution companies, like, 'if I increase my costs, I get to take more profit' that can have bad effects. But as I have said many times, I believe that the PUCs and DEPs in many states are likely corrupted if not completely captured.

My family at Eversource has told me countless stories about corrupt weatherization contractors doing shoddy (or reporting non-existent) work to inflate their billing (paid out of the 'Mass Save' or equivalent bill rider). When the largest contractor was called out, everyone just turned a blind eye, and the whistleblowers were all fired. There are similar stories about the DEP not giving a hoot about program effectiveness, or actually watering down utility goals to pointlessness.

Since its hard to tell when a regulatory system has been captured, my simple metric is 'does a given market pay a lot more for power than other regional markets with a similar climate, population density and age of construction'? By that metric New England has some 'splaining to do.

 

[DBoon]

I want to know if the stats are normalized to the sales numbers.

Admittedly, your story and my story about reliability of our EVs are just anecdotal, not data. BUT, Tesla Model X (as reported widely) doesn't seem built to be durable and requires a lot of expensive repairs. Model 3 and Model Y less so. However, with Tesla's management seemingly very disinterested in running a car company long term, and with some of the goofy band-aid engineering I've read about in Tesla models (not considering the Cybertruck in this discussion - I consider that an ego-driven one-off disaster), I would not consider a Tesla for my next EV (setting aside any other considerations that might cloud the decision).

Thus, Tesla went from not considered by me ~7 years ago (had just released their first mass-market car, the Model 3, which was a sedan and I wanted a hatchback anyways, and their financial viability was not a given) to would not be considered by me now because, despite having become the most successful and valuable EV company in the world in the last 7 years, now seem to be a risky bet in terms of buying a car that will work reliably for many years and be able to be serviced for what I consider to be a reasonable 10-15 year vehicle lifetime.

Pretty amazing run for Tesla in just 10 years, good and bad.

 

[DBoon]

Its canonical that electrical utilities are 'natural monopolies' and thus need regulation and close supervision. I am certain that the existing PUC system creates bizarre incentives for the generation and distribution companies, like, 'if I increase my costs, I get to take more profit' that can have bad effects. But as I have said many times, I believe that the PUCs and DEPs in many states are likely corrupted if not completely captured.

My belief is that the true crime is the guaranteed 9% return given to utilities for investments in transmission and distribution improvements. Those kinds of returns just invite gaming of the system. Then, on top of that, PUC boards are not staffed with people (it seems, overall from what I have read) who have the ability to understand and properly regulate the investment decisions for these improvements, and just rubber stamp what the utilities give them.

How else could the little electric co-op in the town just south of me provide all of the distribution network for a wide geographical area (not just a little village) and (as of 4 years ago) provide an all-in electricity price of 4 cents/kWh. OK, admittedly, they got power at cost from NYPA for about 1.5 cents/kWh (longstanding Niagara Falls hydropower agreement dating back 100+ years), but that still meant they could provide distribution for 2.5 cents/kWh. My utility (NYSEG) is up to nearly 10 cents/kWh for distribution at this point (luckily, I am 100% solar PV with yearly net metering). What does NYSEG really provide for an extra 7.5 cents/kWh, besides profit to their investors?

 

[EbS-P]

My belief is that the true crime is the guaranteed 9% return given to utilities for investments in transmission and distribution improvements. Those kinds of returns just invite gaming of the system. Then, on top of that, PUC boards are not staffed with people (it seems, overall from what I have read) who have the ability to understand and properly regulate the investment decisions for these improvements, and just rubber stamp what the utilities give them.

How else could the little electric co-op in the town just south of me provide all of the distribution network for a wide geographical area (not just a little village) and (as of 4 years ago) provide an all-in electricity price of 4 cents/kWh. OK, admittedly, they got power at cost from NYPA for about 1.5 cents/kWh (longstanding Niagara Falls hydropower agreement dating back 100+ years), but that still meant they could provide distribution for 2.5 cents/kWh. My utility (NYSEG) is up to nearly 10 cents/kWh for distribution at this point (luckily, I am 100% solar PV with yearly net metering). What does NYSEG really provide for an extra 7.5 cents/kWh, besides profit to their investors?

The local co-op utility here has to buy from Duke. They have had higher rates than Duke for a decade. Now the utility co op back I. Kansas still sends my parents dividends 15 years after they moved to NC. They managed electricity and gas.

If we really wanted to be green 40k spent on solar probably reduces CO2 emissions by a factor of 2-3x more than driving the EV 10k a year. (But you still have to drive something).

 

[DBoon]

NYPA gives a pretty sweet deal to the upstate cooperatives. Supposedly, it can't change by law (must be sold at cost), but I've heard the accountants are busy trying to figure out how to make the cost higher.