cheaper to operate than an electric car?

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard

Tires and wiper blades are on all vehicles. Costs that matter are the ones that don't offset because both EV's and ICE's have them.

True enough, but you keep saying ZERO maintenance costs.

So, the entire ignition system in an ICE is a MOVING PART?

Well, it wears out, doesn't it? That's why I have to replace my spark plugs every 105K miles.

By that same hair-splitting "logic", an ICE would have to include the billions of moving gasoline molecules, and in the billions in the exhaust gasses, too.

No, because you "maintain" those molecules by getting new ones. But that's aside from the point I was trying to make, which is that batteries (and AFAIK all batteries) degrade over time, because the chemical reactions (in which the atoms are the "moving parts") are not perfectly efficient.

Just for a concrete example, take the battery in the computer I'm using to write this. Doing cat /proc/acpi/battery/BAT0/info (if you run Linux) gives

design capacity: 84240 mWh
last full capacity: 68190 mWh

so despite a very light use cycle (99% of the time it's in a docking station, running off A/C) the battery has lost capacity over the years.

Now with an IC vehicle, when it wears enough that performance degrades, I can fix it with relative ease. (Though my two current vehicles, 1988 and 2000 models, are still going strong as far as engines are concerned.) Can't (again, AFAIK) do something similar with an EV: when the battery degrades too far, the only fix seems to be a complete replacement. Which, if current usage patterns hold, means that 1) people will junk otherwise perfectly servicable vehicles; and 2) people who'd buy inexpensive 20 year old IC-engined vehicles will have no options.

[Hersbird]

Only 50% of used car purchases are financed and I would bet most of the cars poor people buy aren't even eligible for financing. You guys just want to make the numbers look better for an EV but when you put all costs down nothing beats a 15 year old regular old Craigslist special. The fact there was whining about the cost of gas being too low further proves the point. I was just pointing out that increasing the price of gas will hit the working poor and middle class the hardest.

[sendler]

Originally Posted by Hersbird

I was just pointing out that increasing the price of gas will hit the working poor and middle class the hardest.

Not trying to hit poor people. Just trying get people to quit buying 18mpg pickup trucks to drive back and forth to work.

[redpoint5]

An engine rebuild isn't a trivial thing. I'd much rather replace a battery in a vehicle than an engine. A battery is a few electrical connectors and some bolts holding it in. It takes basic home tools to change it out. Of course, battery prices are much higher than engine prices at the moment...

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

An engine rebuild isn't a trivial thing.

Trivial, no, but doable by someone who's not a professional mechanic (e.g. me :-)), and for not a lot of money.

Of course, battery prices are much higher than engine prices at the moment...

Yes, that's my point. A new battery pack is not something that most used car owners would even think of purchasing, because it's cheaper just to buy another car. Of course that changes if the price drops by a factor of 10 or so, but that's a pretty big if.

[NeilBlanchard]

Originally Posted by jamesqf

True enough, but you keep saying ZERO maintenance costs.

I said EV's have zero regular maintenance costs. And ALL vehicle have tires and wipers, etc. - so how does that matter to this discussion?

Originally Posted by jamesqf

Well, it wears out, doesn't it? That's why I have to replace my spark plugs every 105K miles.

So, you claim they are moving (even though they are not) because they wear out? You keep attempting to redefine words, rather than discuss facts.

Originally Posted by jamesqf

No, because you "maintain" those molecules by getting new ones. But that's aside from the point I was trying to make, which is that batteries (and AFAIK all batteries) degrade over time, because the chemical reactions (in which the atoms are the "moving parts") are not perfectly efficient.

Just for a concrete example, take the battery in the computer I'm using to write this. Doing cat /proc/acpi/battery/BAT0/info (if you run Linux) gives

design capacity: 84240 mWh
last full capacity: 68190 mWh

so despite a very light use cycle (99% of the time it's in a docking station, running off A/C) the battery has lost capacity over the years.

Now with an IC vehicle, when it wears enough that performance degrades, I can fix it with relative ease. (Though my two current vehicles, 1988 and 2000 models, are still going strong as far as engines are concerned.) Can't (again, AFAIK) do something similar with an EV: when the battery degrades too far, the only fix seems to be a complete replacement. Which, if current usage patterns hold, means that 1) people will junk otherwise perfectly servicable vehicles; and 2) people who'd buy inexpensive 20 year old IC-engined vehicles will have no options.

You are making some sort of deflective straw man argument. Electrons are not "moving parts"; no matter how much you want them to be.

Here are the moving parts unique to an EV:

Motor rotor (1)
Its bearings (2)
Two reduction gears (2)
Their bearings (4)

Then there are the parts they have in common with all cars: the differential, U-joints / CVT joints, wheel / brake hubs and their bearings. Oh, and the wheels.

If you can even count all the moving parts in an ICE, then I think you will have to concede that EV's are MUCH easier to maintain, and understand that they will last MUCH longer.

Batteries will last as long as a typical ICE and/or it's transmission. Individual cells and/or modules can be replaced. You continue to overemphasize this; despite a lack of any evidence.

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard

I said EV's have zero regular maintenance costs. And ALL vehicle have tires and wipers, etc. - so how does that matter to this discussion?

It matters when people claim that EVs are zero maintenance (or nearly so), glossing over the fact that there are a lot of common items that will need maintenance.

So, you claim they are moving (even though they are not) because they wear out?

No, I am saying that they are maintenance items because they wear, and - like it or not - that wear is due to the movement of electrons.

Electrons are not "moving parts"; no matter how much you want them to be.

Electrons do move, that's basic physics. And various ions do move in batteries.

If you can even count all the moving parts in an ICE, then I think you will have to concede that EV's are MUCH easier to maintain, and understand that they will last MUCH longer.

Have you counted all the individual cells in an EV battery pack? (7104 in a Tesla 84 KWh pack, per this: https://electrek.co/2016/02/03/tesla...r-down-85-kwh/ ) Each one is subject to 'wear' (I admit that's not a precise term, but the problem is the language not having a 1:1 relationship to reality), and is a failure point.

Batteries will last as long as a typical ICE and/or it's transmission. Individual cells and/or modules can be replaced.

Tell this to someone who hasn't been driving a 2000 Insight for the last 13 years or so. (And whose other vehicle isn't a 1988 model.) When I first bought it, I could use most of the battery capacity (per the gauge) in hill climbing &c. Now (and despite rebalancing &c every year or so) I can use barely 1/4 of the gauge capacity before the system either recals or throws an IMA fault. Which requires 'maintenance' of a sort: pry out the #18 fuse and wait for a system reset.

[Ecky]

Agreed, the ICE in my Insight is definitely going to outlast the battery, even putting a lot of miles on it, and a replacement engine at this point can be found for around $300.

Batteries are wear items, they're more expensive than engines, and don't last as long as engines. Compared with very fuel efficient ICE vehicles, the economics just don't work yet. When gas prices go back up and battery prices come down it'll be different, but we're not quite there yet.

Speaking of cheap gas, I recently read an article that North Sea oil production is ramping up, which may well cause prices to drop further.

[vskid3]

Originally Posted by jamesqf

Tell this to someone who hasn't been driving a 2000 Insight for the last 13 years or so. (And whose other vehicle isn't a 1988 model.) When I first bought it, I could use most of the battery capacity (per the gauge) in hill climbing &c. Now (and despite rebalancing &c every year or so) I can use barely 1/4 of the gauge capacity before the system either recals or throws an IMA fault. Which requires 'maintenance' of a sort: pry out the #18 fuse and wait for a system reset.

While I see your point, using the Insight's battery as an example of battery wear is going to the extreme (also NiMH vs Lithium). We all know the Insight and Civic hybrid's batteries like to die, but there are plenty of other hybrids that fare much better (my '05 Prius has almost 130k miles on the original battery and my parent's '06 Escape hybrid has about 185k miles on the original battery). Probably the only scenario for an EV battery having a similar lifespan of the Insight's would be the first few model years of the Leaf in a hot place like Phoenix.

[ME_Andy]

This thread is TLDR; long story short, ICE and ev cost about the same because capitalism.

We are about to trade my wife's 2012 sonic (32 mpg) for a 2015 leaf. The upgrade will cost $6500 and I figure it will save about $100/mo. Financially smart? Not sure, but she Loves driving it, it will take some duty off my car, and it's less of a hassle because maintenance will be easier.