DIY Electric Car Forums banner

1 - 1 of 1 Posts

70 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Re: [EVDL] Interesting ... (Purdue article)

Rick wrote: "It's actually saying "States--California in
particular--should pay attention to their electric rates because those
can slow the adoption of PHEVs."

Actually the damning thing is that the article's not saying anything of
value at all! Many states -- as pointed out in the article, California
included! -- have already provided for adoption of EVs as they already
have residential time-of-use/market-rate plans in place, all the EV
driver has to do is:

1. Be made aware of it, either through their own research or
their friendly EV dealer
2. Fill out the paperwork and make the switch
3. Charge at night and watch their usage during the summer A/C
a. Do an energy-audit of their household and reduce
load, use natural lighting/cooling/insulate
b. Buy a very efficient EV to start with...
4. California is particularly easy to justify PV panels based on
pay-back period due to both the high levels of sun and high price for
grid-based electricity!

This is what is maddening to me about the article: they ring the alarm
bell, but yet the solution is plain to see in the article itself (which
they conveniently mention and then set aside as an assumption that an EV
owner for some reason wouldn't use!)

In Illinois, land of cheap non-renewable electricity (coal/nuke) our
averaged-use rate plan is around $0.12/kwh (Oct 09-Oct 10) -- but
overnight the prices drop to 2-cents per KWH or lower (today's peak is
5.2 cents during the 5pm hour), and at times we've been paid to use
electricity (July 4th weekend, 2 or so years ago, prices went negative).
Having an EV with a smart charger that can tune into those price
listings ( and
can change amperage draw based on the price for that hour...

The article and the research is pointless (from a practical-person's
point of view) -- it's a no brainer that if you drive an EV and you want
to minimize your costs you charge overnight on a variable-rate
market-pricing electricity plan. What *would* be valuable research/data
would be to show:

1. How much you save charging an EV at night on market-based
pricing compared to at night/anytime on averaged-use rate plan (or
charging during the day on a market-rate plan - gack!)
2. How THIS compares to EITHER a dino-fueled or 100% (or heck,
E85) bio-fueled vehicle.

The dirty little secret is that commercial B100 (100% biodiesel) would
be around $6 a gallon... the biodiesel you buy at the pump is typically
B11 because subsidies (ie federal discounts) are only up-to B10 (so they
kick in an extra percentage in case they're tested). This was relayed
to me by an Illinois fuel distributor I called from that listed
retailing B100 (they don't, it's bad info).

[email protected]
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of Rick Beebe
Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 10:53 AM
To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List
Subject: Re: [EVDL] Interesting ...

On 01/20/2011 03:26 PM, Roger Heuckeroth wrote:
> What's interesting is that the Purdue professor, Wally Tyner, cited in
> this article is a big Biofuels proponent. Just search his name, and
> that is clearly what his bread and butter research is on. So... I
> would not consider this a unbiased source.
> However, its an interesting premise. Unless EV buyers sign up for
> time of use metering, they may see substantial hikes in their electric
> bill. But Wally states that oil would need to go to $171+/bbl for EVs
> to become competitive. That obviously wrong. I can't imagine what
> biased assumptions he must have made to justify that statement.
> Say if you travel 1500 miles per month
> If you have an EV that averages 300 Wh/mile and even if you pay $0.20/
> kWh that comes to $90/month
> $90 will buy you about 25 gallons of gas at todays prices, so you
> would need a 60 mpg car to break even.
> So, even at todays price and 20 cent/kWh EVs still look good.
> Am I missing something?

Yes, the extra $10,000 it costs to buy the electric car in the first

I don't agree with some of the numbers and conclusions in the study, but

it's important to note that it doesn't appear to be saying "PHEVs aren't



| REPLYING: address your message to [email protected] only.
| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.

| REPLYING: address your message to [email protected] only.
| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
1 - 1 of 1 Posts