Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesqf
Because whenever we show (with real-world data) that vehicle X is cheaper than an EV, you all come back with specious arguments that it's not comparable, even though it performs the same task equally well.
|
...and every time I show that the cherry-picked example cars aren't comparable, you simply say that YOU don't care for the extra seating capacity, or luxury amenities.
Now we're back to me re-itterating that, in general, it's cheaper to operate an EV than a comparable oil burner (range limitations aside).
You seem to imply that it's never the case that an EV is the cheaper option for some people. If that's what you mean, then clearly state that (and I will provide abundant evidence that you're wrong).
I'll state my position in a simplified way. An EV of a certain shape and rolling resistance is cheaper to operate per mile driven than its combustion engine counterpart, for the majority of people in the US, the majority of the time.
It's true in my case, where it costs me $0.04/mile to drive my Prius with gas, and $0.02/mile on electricity. Furthermore, I pay nothing in maintenance for the EV portion of my drivetrain per year, but have to pay for regular oil changes for the combustion portion of my drivetrain.
The thread title is about which is cheaper to operate, not which is cheaper to purchase, not which is cheaper when a catastrophic failure occurs. Based on this topic, the most relevant thing to consider is the cost per mile driven on gasoline compared to the cost per mile driven on electrons. Usually electrons are cheaper, sometimes gasoline is.