Study – California electricity too expensive for plug-ins
Not a good car for California?
Time to kill the tiered-pricing system?
A new study out of Purdue suggests that even if plug-in vehicle prices come down significantly, they still won’t be very cost-effective in places like California due to high electricity rates.
Based on California’s current system for pricing electricity, Chevy Volt buyers for instance, will spend $10,000 more in total costs compared to a Toyota Prius or a Chevy Cobalt, even after a $7500 tax credit, unless oil prices rise significantly – as high as $254 per barrel.
Thus, the study suggests that California move from a tiered-pricing system to either a flat rate or time of day system.
Today Californians pay “an average of 14.42 cents per kilowatt hour, about 35 percent higher than the national average,” but adding a plug-in under this system of pricing would increase electricity prices 60 percent according to the study.
Interestingly, I tried moving off the tired system to a time of day plan that my utility offers, but based on my consumption patterns I couldn’t get it to work. I’m sure California will ultimately go out of its way to ensure that plug-in charging doesn’t lead to excessive charges, but it seems to me that California needs to come up with a smarter pricing model for all electricity consumers.
Anyway, perhaps instead of a plug-in tax credit, any plug-in purchase should come with a home solar system that can easily provide at least 300 miles of EV range per day?
The suggestion at the end of the article that plug-ins might come with a home solar system is well-intentioned, but not practical. Many homes are not suitable for solar for a variety of reasons: shade, pitch, contiguous roof space, etc.,
The simplest thing to do is for the utilities to reduce the price of off-peak electricity so that it reflects the time-of-day cost to the utility. This solution need not be, and shouldn’t be, mutually exclusive with a tiered system. Rather than having a tier structure based on aggregate use, peak and off-peak (and any further subcategories) would have separate tiers structures independent of each other.
The tier levels for off-peak would be set so that the extra power used charging a car at night would not be enough to bump the consumer out of the base tier. Yet if someone were running a hydroponic system (or some other high power use), there would still be a tier system in place to prevent abuse and excess.
Good data Mike. And extrapolating further, if you decided to go greener or wanted better fuel efficiency, then a conventional hybrid, such as the Prius would be best. Very interesting, especially since California is going to be the key market for hybrid adoption.
I live in Orange, California, and due to Edison’s tiered electrical rates, my full cost for additional electrical consumption (including distribution costs) is $.32/KWH. The Nissan Leaf should achieve around 3.2 miles per KWH. That calculates to a cost of $.10 per mile. My Turbo Audi A3 actually gets 32 MPG on trips. With gasoline costing $3.20 per gallon ($.10 per mile), guess which vehicle I would prefer to drive.
I don’t think of ME when I write Larry. I’ve already over-spent to reduce my foreign oil footprint.
The only way to achieve foreign oil independence is when at least most of us are willing to pay a reasonable price. That’s my focus. What will it take for “most of us” to do what is necessary? For instance, if someone proved that cow shit could end foreign oil dependence, I’d give up advocating for battery-powered vehicles and focus on cows.
For now I still believe batteries have an important role to play, but my goal is foreign oil independence. Several years ago, however, I believe that batteries were the ONLY solution, now I’m more open to supplementary technologies.
I think if you could put an 80% charge on an electric car in 15 minutes, you’re gold.
well geeze Dach.. are you not willing to pay a reasonable price to get us off of foreign oil?
you want us off foreign oil for “cheap”?
larry-
that quick charge really does bring up an interesting point regarding peak hours.
a lot of studies have suggest that small battery plug-ins capable of dynamic charging are the key to plug-in cost-effectiveness based on today’s and near term battery technologies. but is that possible without major upgrades to the grid?
Larry,
The cost analysis I saw was broken down over the life of the vehicle. Likewise, it’s probably a very generalized cost.
Would refueling still be cheap?
I’m not sure. The EPA says the Leaf should cost $561 to fill up every year – that’s pure electricity. The Volt’s costs were higher. The Prius costs $927 to fill up every year. The cost drive to 25 miles in a Prius is about $1.50. That’s the bottom of the Volt’s EV range, which would cost $1.50 on average for that range, not including California, before switching to gasoline at which point the Volt is less efficient than the Prius.
Now add in the California prices and there isn’t much difference between filling up a Prius with gas or an EV with electricity in terms of fueling. The pricing difference, however, is quite large, especially if there isn’t a tax credit.
However, if battery prices go down – say enough to cover the tax credit – the the Leaf is somewhat price competitive, the Volt is not. Of course the Leaf’s limited range is going to scare away most consumers.
Additionally, one might argue gas prices are going up. Well, electricity rates are expected to increase significantly over the next decade, something like 30 percent I think I saw recently. Plus, in California, there is a mandate for significantly more green electricity. I’ll bet that green energy, at least in the interim, is also going to push up costs of electricity. Since California is supposed to be the driver of the plug-in movement, this issue could be problematic.
Hey Dach – did you say how much more a “fillup” would cost with expensive California electricity?
seems like even if twice as much it still would be cheap… no?
It depends on which problems you are trying to solve….
If you are looking to lower your driving costs or elimimate coal usage, that’s one thing. If you are focusing on reducing foreign oil independence, that’s a different story………
not sure where I read this – but if you have 440 volts – you can put a 80% charge on the Nissan Leaf in 30 minutes.
the costs was in the thousands…of dollars… and I’m not sure I understand why unless homes typically do not have 440 volt (which if true would explain the concern of the power companies of people “topping off” their plug-ins during peak power hours).
But 30 minutes is getting close to what I think the average person would put up with in terms of waiting for the care to be fueled.
makes me wonder if a service station had 880 volts if they could “fill” the car in 15 minutes.
Now – you can see the potential for plug-in cars to royally screw up the grid – especially at peak hours.
games? in what regard?
here’s my deal on this and many other issues.
we need to be literate in the subject and I’m sure you too have at times felt that you didn’t know something or “enough” and not knowing inhibits or ability to be “sure” about choices.
Back away from that concept two or three notches and you’re dealing with the average American … who can’t show you Afghanistan on a world map or tell you who Hillary Clinton is but can tell you who Sara Pallin is and what an IPOD is.
the older I get – the more I realize how much I Do not know… and how they renders me somewhat illiterate on seemingly ridiculously simple things…
Interesting observation, Larry. My experiences with my utility suggest the same.
Are we just playing games?
Dach – California has the correct pricing model.
Time of day dynamic pricing is where we have to go as a nation because peak hour power costs the power companies themselves about 7 times as much as base power does and a flat pricing system essentially subsidizes peak power.
Electricity usage in California is 1/2 what it is in the rest of the nation – and is pretty much in line with electricity consumption in Europe and Japan.
This goes back to trading oil for coal.
Cheap electricity comes from coal but coal has serious environmental consequences.
Some of us do not think trading foreign oil for more domestic air pollution is a good trade and it looks like California agrees.
electric power over and above the coal-generated base power comes from natural gas turbines (and solar/wind/hydro/nuke)so I’ve always wondered in terms of electricity generated from natural gas – at significant higher costs …would be more efficient and cost-effective as a fuel for hybrids….
I guess it might boil down to what the cost of transporting natural gas to the car is … is it more or less efficient to move natural gas in a pipeline than electricity on a power line?
But the clear goal of the electricity providers in California is to generate peak power not from coal – and at a cost o about 7 times that of coal – and to pass tha cost on to the people who want peak power.