The True Cost of Owning a Car.

6097 Views 15 Replies 12 Participants Last post by Ladogaboy, Aug 21, 2012

jbfalaska

Discussion Starter · Aug 19, 2012

I certainly believe there are many like me regarding the true cost of purchasing a car over the life of the car. The car purchase for me is sliced up mainly as a Fuel Purchase and Import versus American parts purchase.

Cost of fuel and oil changes $4500 per year x 10 years on average is how long I keep a car. And the price of gas is going nowhere but up it seems. $45,000

Cost of the car is typically $35,000 for me, plus a $3,000 in taxes and $3,000 in fees over 10 years. About $41,000Of that, about half is American parts and the rest foreign. My purchases fortunately split Canadaian and American which are so similar in beliefs, economies, etc.,, this is a pleasure to do.

Now, the VAST majority that I can control appears to be fuel. Very glad the Volt is here. Let's hope they spike the battery capability to 100 miles or more. I'm all in on electric.

1 - 16 of 16 Posts

Ekohler2004

· #2 · Aug 19, 2012

Someone told me that charging the battery uses coal-fired power plants (here in Indiana), so the car doesn't seem to be very "green." I said the point is that it's fueled by American power, and not by middle east oil. I'd rather support American coal workers than anything in the middle east. He eventually understood my point.

I need to find a bumpersticker that says something like: FU OPEC

bonaire

· #3 · Aug 19, 2012 (Edited)

For me, I'm getting a new lesson on the costs associated with Insurance. Adding my son to our policy, the guys at Allstate say that if we make him the primary driver on our 2005 mini-van, we can pay about $700/year or if we add him as primary for the Volt it is about $2300/year. So, for young folks, costs of ownership really has to bring in the insurance, registration and other fees as well.

Yesterday, took my son and daughter to a new electric indoor go-kart facility in Horsham, PA. Impressive. Italian-made electric go-karts capable of 45mph. And, being 2 weeks old, they performed quite well. They must have been a good 25-30hp. I'm going to find out what the specs on them are. An employee there said that they were roughly $100K each. (can't verify)

Also, fueled with 26kWh of American-made electricity in the Volt yesterday and another 13 overnight and drove it about 85 EV miles yesterday and used about 1.7 gallon for the rest of the day (total 150 miles for the day).

Steverino

· #4 · Aug 19, 2012

I'm with you, jbfalaska. Same here.

Ekohler2004, the coal issue is bogus, but the reasons why regrettably require more than a bumper sticker.

"In a typical passenger car, only about 15 to 20 percent of the energy in the fuel tank actually gets used by the internal combustion engine to move the vehicle down the road. Most of the BTU of gasoline is lost in friction or heat, and some is wasted during idling or deceleration.

But electric motors are much simpler than gasoline or diesel engines, with no ignition or compression, no fuel lines, tanks, or exhaust systems. EVs convert about 60 percent of the electrical energy from the grid to power at the wheels, say U.S. government energy analysts. That's one of the reasons why studies have found that a shift to EVs would reduce greenhouse gas emissions, even if a large part of the electric power system is fired by carbon-intensive coal.

And unlike gasoline engines, electric motors provide an opportunity to further drive down emissions. Mitt Romney, the presumptive Republican nominee in the U.S. presidential race, said you can't drive a car with a windmill on it. That's true. But you can charge an EV using wind, solar, hydropower, or nuclear energy to sever carbon emissions from driving."

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/...oad-to-55-mpg-motor-testing_58354_600x450.jpg

The leading power source for generating electricity is now natural gas, coal is now in second place. Then there is hydro, wind, solar, etc. The local mix may vary of course. Some areas get the majority from hydro for example.

Plus, an EV is the only car that get's "cleaner" as the power supply does.

See less See more

JamesMcQuaid

· #5 · Aug 19, 2012 (Edited)

Mitt Romney, the presumptive Republican nominee in the U.S. presidential race, said you can't drive a car with a windmill on it.

However, Mitt can drive a car with a dog on it.

VikAiRious

· #6 · Aug 19, 2012

Steverino said:
I'm with you, jbfalaska. Same here.

Ekohler2004, the coal issue is bogus, but the reasons why regrettably require more than a bumper sticker.

"In a typical passenger car, only about 15 to 20 percent of the energy in the fuel tank actually gets used by the internal combustion engine to move the vehicle down the road. Most of the BTU of gasoline is lost in friction or heat, and some is wasted during idling or deceleration.

But electric motors are much simpler than gasoline or diesel engines, with no ignition or compression, no fuel lines, tanks, or exhaust systems. EVs convert about 60 percent of the electrical energy from the grid to power at the wheels, say U.S. government energy analysts. That's one of the reasons why studies have found that a shift to EVs would reduce greenhouse gas emissions, even if a large part of the electric power system is fired by carbon-intensive coal.

And unlike gasoline engines, electric motors provide an opportunity to further drive down emissions. Mitt Romney, the presumptive Republican nominee in the U.S. presidential race, said you can't drive a car with a windmill on it. That's true. But you can charge an EV using wind, solar, hydropower, or nuclear energy to sever carbon emissions from driving."

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/...oad-to-55-mpg-motor-testing_58354_600x450.jpg

The leading power source for generating electricity is now natural gas, coal is now in second place. Then there is hydro, wind, solar, etc. The local mix may vary of course. Some areas get the majority from hydro for example.

Plus, an EV is the only car that get's "cleaner" as the power supply does.

You forgot the third leading source of generation of electricity in the US - Nuclear!

DonC

· #7 · Aug 19, 2012

Ekohler2004 said:
Someone told me that charging the battery uses coal-fired power plants (here in Indiana), so the car doesn't seem to be very "green."

But an electric does have the potential to be green. An ICE is cleanest on the day it's made. After that it's all downhill as the engine gets less efficient. An EV on the other hand becomes greener as the grid is upgraded. With coal rapidly being replaced by high efficiency combined cycle natural gas plants, your Volt will be greener next year than this year, far greener in five years, and potentially extremely green in fifteen years, assuming it's on the road. Can't say that for any ICE.

Ladogaboy

· #8 · Aug 19, 2012

I've been hearing different information on oil imports, so I decided to check for myself: http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_move_impcus_a2_nus_ep00_im0_mbbl_m.htm

According to my crude calculations, 40% of our imported oil comes from OPEC countries. Now that is far from what I have heard some people saying, "We aren't reliant on OPEC at all." But it is nice to know that, as a country, we have fairly diverse sources for our energy.

And in terms of burning fossil fuels to power EVs, it is still better than the alternative. Stanford did research (the abstract should still be available online) that showed that EVs, even if powered by fossil fuels through the grid, were almost 40% more efficient than their most efficient gasoline counterparts.

solar_dave

· #9 · Aug 19, 2012

Solar solar solar me likes solar, at least here in AZ. Our purchases from the grid this year is well under $200 for our complete household consumption. AZ is moving greener with large solar projects and a large part of our local power comes from Palo Verde nuclear plant, one of e largest in the nation. It sells to SoCal as well. We still have over 1500 kWh in our on peak consumption bank and will get credit for about 3000-4000 kWh on Dec 31 @ $0.065 per kWh.

So paid for solar with full ROI make it virtual free to drive a pair of Volts. Me likes!

USe-car

· #10 · Aug 19, 2012

jbfalaska said:
I certainly believe there are many like me regarding the true cost of purchasing a car over the life of the car. The car purchase for me is sliced up mainly as a Fuel Purchase and Import versus American parts purchase.

Cost of fuel and oil changes $4500 per year x 10 years on average is how long I keep a car. And the price of gas is going nowhere but up it seems. $45,000

Cost of the car is typically $35,000 for me, plus a $3,000 in taxes and $3,000 in fees over 10 years. About $41,000Of that, about half is American parts and the rest foreign. My purchases fortunately split Canadaian and American which are so similar in beliefs, economies, etc.,, this is a pleasure to do.

Now, the VAST majority that I can control appears to be fuel. Very glad the Volt is here. Let's hope they spike the battery capability to 100 miles or more. I'm all in on electric.

Good post on an important subject. Apparently, though, your thread seems to have been hijacked.

bonaire

· #11 · Aug 19, 2012 (Edited)

solar_dave said:
Solar solar solar me likes solar, at least here in AZ. Our purchases from the grid this year is well under $200 for our complete household consumption. AZ is moving greener with large solar projects and a large part of our local power comes from Palo Verde nuclear plant, one of e largest in the nation. It sells to SoCal as well. We still have over 1500 kWh in our on peak consumption bank and will get credit for about 3000-4000 kWh on Dec 31 @ $0.065 per kWh.

So paid for solar with full ROI make it virtual free to drive a pair of Volts. Me likes!

It just seems so localized, though. Incentives per state vary based on energy needs of the energy plants in each state's regulatory commission, peak loads, growth rates, etc. I live in the north east (Pennsylvania) and our state is not gaining population much (only 3.4% from 2000-2010), so it's not exactly in their interest to get more renewables but rather to increase demand on current energy plants. Similar in a few other down-trending states. Our state incentives for solar are used up and the SREC market is toast.

I'm in talks with a solar installer who is slow at responding and seems to be distracted by larger projects (profit per installed Watt) now rather than my "small" system I intend to do. prices here still are in the $5/Watt when done by an integrator and that's too high for any reasonable payback. Our state electric rate is dipping slightly too - down .01/kWh this year over last. That's rare - and fed by the state's new "glut" of natural gas. Which is temporary.

If I do solar, it'll be with an eye toward fueling my Volt and perhaps a 2nd one in a year or two. Plus, to hedge against a future rate increase by the electric co. But my computations are a 10-year payback even including the SRECs (only $20 now per MWh produced - once were $300+) and 30% federal tax credit. I can get the same payback with a properly invested High Yield mutual fund.

See less See more

solar_dave

· #12 · Aug 19, 2012 (Edited)

bonaire said:
If I do solar, it'll be with an eye toward fueling my Volt and perhaps a 2nd one in a year or two. Plus, to hedge against a future rate increase by the electric co. But my computations are a 10-year payback even including the SRECs (only $20 now per MWh produced - once were $300+) and 30% federal tax credit. I can get the same payback with a properly invested High Yield mutual fund.

Yep I have to agree, solar is not right for everyone, the numbers have to line up. Most can get 6-7 year payback with a proper TOU plan, shorter with the right incentives like California. I am fortunate in that the utility incentives and the tax incentives lined up well for an early ROI, I am not sure I could do the same with today's kickbacks. Today $4 a watt here is pretty typical before any incentives. The cost of on peak electric has to be pretty high to get a healthy payback. Still if you can get the numbers to line up and maybe consider the green aspects and long term fixed cost as having some intangible personal value it is still worth evaluating.

Of course conservation is still the bests return on investment, we did all that first.

Norm51

· #13 · Aug 21, 2012

bonaire said:
... took my son and daughter to a new electric indoor go-kart facility in Horsham, PA. Impressive. Italian-made electric go-karts capable of 45mph. And, being 2 weeks old, they performed quite well. They must have been a good 25-30hp. ....

I was reading another Volt owner's blog awhile back and he mentioned that his dad, a WWII flight instructor, built an electric car/go-cart for him, when he was a kid, using the starter from an airplane engine.

Sounds like the same concept.

Cheers,

Norm
Future Volt Owner

Ron C

· #14 · Aug 21, 2012

DonC said:
But an electric does have the potential to be green. An ICE is cleanest on the day it's made. After that it's all downhill as the engine gets less efficient. An EV on the other hand becomes greener as the grid is upgraded. With coal rapidly being replaced by high efficiency combined cycle natural gas plants, your Volt will be greener next year than this year, far greener in five years, and potentially extremely green in fifteen years, assuming it's on the road. Can't say that for any ICE.

I went to a presentation by ECOtality yesterday regarding the expansion of the EVproject to Chicago. They made this same point - with the "greening" of the electric grid, EVs participate in that greening for free, without having to take any action, while those stuck in the ICE age do so only indirectly, and minimally at that, with no possibility of significant improvement.

It's clear that this is a motivator for some people and governments. Green is not a motivator for me; I'm more of a lazy pragmatist: if I can get the same value at the same cost for a green thing as a "less green" thing (brown?), then if it's easy I'll do the more green thing. If, like in this case, I get a higher value for the same cost (or same value for less cost) by appearing green, that works for me. 50 miles on $0.50 worth of electricity vs $4.00 worth of gasoline fits that description.

DonC

· #15 · Aug 21, 2012

Ron C said:
Green is not a motivator for me; I'm more of a lazy pragmatist: if I can get the same value at the same cost for a green thing as a "less green" thing (brown?), then if it's easy I'll do the more green thing. If, like in this case, I get a higher value for the same cost (or same value for less cost) by appearing green, that works for me. 50 miles on $0.50 worth of electricity vs $4.00 worth of gasoline fits that description.

You're in good company because I think this describes at least 90% of the planet! Nissan thought that they could sell boatloads of Leafs by appealing to those wanting green transportation. Turns out there aren't that many of those folks out there.

Ladogaboy

· #16 · Aug 21, 2012

Norm51 said:
I was reading another Volt owner's blog awhile back and he mentioned that his dad, a WWII flight instructor, built an electric car/go-cart for him, when he was a kid, using the starter from an airplane engine.

Sounds like the same concept.

Those starters/generators from WWII aircraft can actually power full-size automobiles, even up to highway speeds. There were quite a few garage-built EVs in the 50s, 60s and 70s based on them.

1 - 16 of 16 Posts

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.