Cost of Driving Gas Fueled Car vs. Electric Over 50 Years (Shocking!)

[grahamhgreen]

From: http://green.autoblog.com/photos/solar-energy-vs-gasoline-fuel-cost-chart/4798701/

Updated - Better LINK - http://green.autoblog.com/2012/02/07/infographic-a-lifetime-of-fuel-costs-gas-vs-solar/

That's the road that Mini E (and now BMW ActiveE) driver Peder Norby is on, and so he did a few calculations to extrapolate his particular set-up – driving electric cars that are powered by the solar panels on his roof – to a lifetime of driving and wanted to share it with AutoblogGreen. ... He writes:

"[The chart] does not include external cost such as the protection of oil, propping up oil supplying countries, clean up of oil, environmental or healthcare cost, nor does it include the cost of grid electricity at night when an electric car normally charges. ... Nor does the graph include the price of the cars themselves. A reasonable argument can be made for both the gasoline car and the electric car as to which one will be cheaper to own and maintain for the next 50 years. I'm betting on the electric car "

[JCMach1]

1. I think this is a bit off... solar panels are not rated for 50 yrs.

and replacement costs are not cheap.

Point taken though... solar IS competitive with fossil fuels...

[diane in sf]

2. They will lose some output, but still be producing electricity. You are likely

to need to replace the roof during that time unless it's metal and then you will have to remount the panels or buy some newer, more efficient, cheaper, replacements. Also your appliances, house, etc. should be getting more energy thrifty over those years.

[JCMach1]

4. Solar will be a big part of the new energy mix...

as we all know the silver bullet isn't out there in one technology.

And yeah, hopefully solar panel replacement would become cheaper over time as well.

[Politicalboi]

6. But the panels get cheaper every year

The car itself should have a panel between the roof and the interior. Like a sun roof to move back and forth on sunny days, and when it's cloudy or raining just close the roof top.

[JCMach1]

7. would be cool to make it see through... like a panorama room

I had a non-solar one of those in the Peugeot I had a few years back...

But yeah, that would be great too.

Also, you can develop better regenerative brakes... and, one could possibly create some electricity with the windflow around the vehicle as it travels. I am thinking something like a scoop with some sort of small wind-powered generator involved (something like sticking a small windmill on your car).

[Fumesucker]

9. The electronics and the motors in electric cars are already pretty sophisticated..

They already are around 90% efficient, there really isn't that much more to be developed every percentage point more of efficiency is going to be hard won, motors and electronics will get smaller, lighter and more intelligent no doubt but batteries are the big limiting factor in electric vehicles..

And extracting energy from the wind flowing around the car is a form of perpetual motion, even if every part was 100% efficient you still wouldn't get any net energy gain from it.

[JCMach1]

25. Not perpetual motion... it's similar to regenerative braking...

The motor naturally uses energy to move the car. Car brakes... then regenerative brakes take that energy and charge the batteries a bit.

Same principal would apply. As the car moves, there is free windflow around the vehicle. If the equipment can be made light enough, there would be a net gain in energy for the batteries if you can tap that.

No, of course, it would not completely charge the vehicle... that wouldn't be the point. It is meant only to help extend the range. Not being an engineer, I don't know why they haven't done it yet... Likely, it would be that benefit to the weight of the equipment ratio.

[Fumesucker]

26. Anything you can do to extract energy from the wind around a car will add drag..

Adding drag will use more energy than you extract from the wind, drag reduction through improved aerodynamics is the single most effective way to increase vehicle efficiency and drag reduction is most easily accomplished at the rear of the vehicle..

Only about a week ago I encountered the first 18 wheeler I have ever seen with a boat tail drag reduction device, this deceptively simple setup along with the side skirts on the trailer cut fuel use by about 12% at cruise speed out on the highway. I've known about these for about five years now but this was the first one I had ever seen in person.

http://www.atdynamics.com/





See the vortices at the rear of the upper image of the pair below? Those vortices are taking energy from the truck moving through the air, the boat tail helps suppress those vortices as in the lower image and thus increases the fuel efficiency.



Here's the same idea applied to a Pontiac Firefly (Canadian Geo Metro), this car gets over 60 mpg, largely due to the drag reduction from the boat tail.

http://autos.aol.com/article/boat-tail-boosts-mpg/



"The goal of a low drag vehicle is to leave as little disturbed air behind you as possible so the more the rear of the vehicle tapers down, the smaller the disturbed wake is behind the vehicle," explains Cosgrove.

[JCMach1]

27. I still say could be done...

just give some engineers, modellers and a wind tunnel...

[Fumesucker]

28. The point is that it's easier and more effective not to put energy into the air in the first place..

The vortices in the picture I put up before represent energy the vehicle is losing to move the air around into what are basically little dust devils that constantly shed off the rear, stop those dust devils and drag falls a lot.

The ideal vehicle wouldn't disturb the air at all, it would go by like an owl flying in the night, you'd never know it was there if you didn't see it.

Note the blunt nose and tapering tail on the Mercedes "Boxfish car", a highly aerodynamic vehicle that uses a boxfish for a model.





ETA: I just remembered, your trick has been tried before.

[JCMach1]

29. That was funny looking...

I think there are ways you can make it more aerodyamic... although I appreciate their effort...

[Fumesucker]

11. Neither are batteries..

Indeed, most batteries will decline in efficiency continuously whether they are used or not, using them only accelerates the decline in efficiency.

[Tippy]

23. GO Electric.......

[slampoet]

31. Bingo, first thing i noticed. Also it assumes constant charging capability for a car you are using

during daylight hours.

This means that there is also a need for a massive onsight battery system to hold the charge until nighttime hours when the car is home to charge it and also as a backup for days w/o sunshine.

AND whatever that battery system is, it certainly won't last 50 years w/o replacement.

[diane in sf]

3. Really cheaper--and I don't think they included the military/oil war costs either.

[JCMach1]

5. but, just speculative, if solar and other alternatives become the norm

(which I would like to see), the price of oil is also going to crash.

So yeah, there is peak oil... but, if technology spreads and gets better, oil usage will plummet and along with it the price.

That is going to take 1, or two more generations of technology though before we really start seeing the effects... However, give it 25yrs and we'll talk.

[txlibdem]

15. The easy to get oil is almost gone

At some point the rise of electric vehicles, coupled with solar, wind and other zero carbon energy sources, will make it uneconomical to search for and extract that last few drops of oil. I can't wait for that day.

[zaj]

10. Battery Replacement cost on vehicle.

Pretty steep compared the cost or 6th year maintenance on a car. Good info though. Seems like the case is there, just poor presentation.

[Javaman]

13. Each car regardless if it's fuel use still takes between...

15 and 25 barrels of oil to produce.

And if it's made of completely recycled materials?

about 16 barrels of oil.

only used cars will be in our future. (or more than likely, none at all. 100 years from now, the means by which we transport ourselves will either consist of feet or animal legs)

until we as a race kick the need of shiny new objects will be be needing oil for a very long time.

I always buy used.

And I'm looking to find an old toyota or (idealy) a datsun to convert to electric.

but then again, even the components that I need to convert to electric are still manufactured via oil based industries.

[txlibdem]

14. Where are you getting that figure of 15 to 25 barrels of oil per vehicle?

It seems pretty exaggerated. I'd like to know your source material (from mining, transportation, smelting, to forming into car parts).

Metal is smelted using electricity: what if that electricity came from solar and wind and any other required heat came from using giant mirrors to concentrate the sun to produce ultra-high temperatures necessary to melt steel and forge aluminum? That is beginning to look like zero barrels of oil per vehicle.

[hunter]

16. Now compare that to a nice pair of walking shoes...

The future is yours!

[ProgressiveEconomist]

17. 50 years?! How many '62 Chevies

still are on the road after 50 years of driving 1,000 miles a month?

And how many electric cars are charged solely from solar panels rather than from coal-fired generators on the power grid?

IMO this analysis is EXTREMELY dishonest. With a 10-year time horizon and realistic costs for power company electricity, IMO initial versions of the comparison must have gone the "wrong" way. Otherwise, these unrealistic assumptions would not have been necessary.

Also, an honest comparison of car costs would have included a hybrid option. IMO, few households would choose pure-electric vehicles with no way to get home other than pushing the car to a proper power outlet and waiting hours for a recharge. Pure electric vehicles are for companies with fleets of short-haul vehicles and their own local recharge stations.

[grahamhgreen]

19. Updated link

Hey, I updated to a better link. But the

This was done by a driver of an EV, not a think tank, so the info is not as complete as it might be, he writes:

"[The chart] does not include external cost such as the protection of oil, propping up oil supplying countries, clean up of oil, environmental or healthcare cost, nor does it include the cost of grid electricity at night when an electric car normally charges. ... Nor does the graph include the price of the cars themselves. A reasonable argument can be made for both the gasoline car and the electric car as to which one will be cheaper to own and maintain for the next 50 years. I'm betting on the electric car "

Updated link: http://green.autoblog.com/2012/02/07/infographic-a-lifetime-of-fuel-costs-gas-vs-solar/


It would be great to see an exhaustive analysis....

[ProgressiveEconomist]

22. 'Nor does it include the cost of grid electricity at night

'Nor does it include the cost of grid electricity at night when an electric car normally charges'

OOPS!

Thanks for your honesty about your post-OP research. Your post #19 explains a lot about the OP.

[txlibdem]

20. I guess we both know that your calculations are way off.

But I didn't need to tell you that.

You want a 10 year horizon. Why not a 1 month horizon: the solar costs $8000 and the gasoline only about $150. Anyone with a grasp of 5th grade math can twist the numbers to "prove" a false belief.

Please do your 10 year calculation and assume annual gasoline price hikes as we've seen them averaged over the past decade. I don't think you'll agree with your post once you do that.

$8,000 divided by 10 years (120 months) comes out to $67 per month to "fuel" your electric car.

At 20 mpg, 12,000 miles per year requires 600 gallons per year, $3.50 per gallon gives us $175 per month for fueling the fossil burner car.

PS, don't forget the cost of oil changes, tune-ups, air filters and all the other costs that a fossil burner costs you but an electric car never will. Whoops! There goes your theory. And don't forget that every time you fill up your tank part of your hard earned cash is going to be funneled to support global terrorists. Wipe the blood from your hands and don't think about that last part, though, so you can sleep at night.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

21. For a driver always on the night shift,

your calculations and those in the OP might work. A night-shift worker might be able to use only solar power to charge up his car during the day. See post #19 for the OP author's addendum to his lead-in.

But most people would have to use mainly power-grid electricity to charge their electric cars at night, or else buy a gasoline-electric hybrid. Your calculations and the OP omit the costs of power-grid electricity and of gasoline for a hybrid car, necessary if the car owner ever goes off the night shift.

[txlibdem]

18. Great post, Graham!

I've never seen the cost calculation taken out to 50 years like that. It makes a huge difference!

I once did a calculation showing that rooftop solar (just enough to provide the electricity to run your electric vehicle) would be cheaper even if gas was $1 per gallon. I'll have to dig up my notes to see how I figured that but I guess a straight division of $275,000 by 3.5 would result in a fossil burner car cost of $78,571. The electric vehicle wins again -- even at $1 per gallon for gasoline!

[guardian]

24. Misleading

The OP doesn't include all costs: the difference in price of the vehicle purchase, cost of replacing batteries in the car (unless the OP asserts that batteries will last 50 years), insurance cost differential, time value of money, etc.

[txlibdem]

30. Your post is misleading

1. The OP stated that neither dollar figure includes cost of maintenance, repair, or replacement of parts of the car or of the entire vehicle.

2. Electric vehicles are only more expensive today because the battery technology is new. They will get cheaper and IMO will by 2020 be less expensive to purchase than a fossil burner vehicle.

3. The OP also fails to add the cost of a permanent military presence protecting the oil production and shipping lanes. Add that cost and electric vehicles are cheaper right now.

4. Time value of money? How about time value of not supporting global terrorist organizations when you buy any oil product?