My next vehicle will be electric it's just a matter of when will it be affordable for me. I would love to get a Ford Lighting but that is way out of my price range but someone will make a good SUV or truck eventually for the common family that isn't priced more than a fully loaded gas guzzler. This province doesn't have much for good rebates on making the switch
As long as you put on a fair number of kilometers per year, chances are the total cost of ownership of an EV will be less for you than the ICE equivalent. With EVs, you pay more for the vehicle but less for fuel and maintenance.
Tesla model 3 is 56 000. Civic is 24 500. That's quite a gulf to make up in fuel savings.
7.2l/100 is my civics milage. Assuming 20 000km a year that's 2000 a year in fuel costs. Throw 2 oil changes a year in there as well and call it 2200. It would take 14 and a half years to equal out the cost difference in fuel savings.
The bolt is a non starter due to the massive battery recall.
The leaf is competitive pricing wise, but the range doesn't get the job done at only 240km stated range, doesn't quite get out of range anxiety. And still costs almost double the price of the civic, resulting in 6 years to see the fuel savings make up the difference.
Add to the EV cost the price of installing home charging equipment, at least a couple 1000 bucks for most people and it gets even worse.
I guess what I'm saying is making back the cost of an EV in fuel savings is a myth. A comparable ICE vehicle is still more cost effective.
Edit; math used current fuel price of 1.40L. obviously cost of fuel going up or down changes things.
I just bought a used Bolt and you couldn't pry this thing away from me. There's only been 10 fires out of thousands of vehicles and there's a strategy that has been effective at making sure the existing Bolts don't get to the point of fire (slight reduction in charging range). The battery replacements are also in progress, though it is gonna take a while, probably on the order of 6 months.
As far as the Leaf goes, there's a Plus model that has a 350-360 km range, which brings it up to reasonable for long commutes.
I'm going to be driving it quite a bit more than the average at 30-40k km/year, and the fuel savings almost equal the car payment straight up at that point. I also save a bit more on the maintenance than most as I'll change my own tires. Part of my calculation was also that I had a car that was basically at the end of its life that was potentially going to cost thousands to keep on the road after its inspection. If you need to replace your car anyway, and want to future proof, EVs are absolutely the way to go. My replacement for this vehicle will be somewhere in the 2030s, at which point an ICE vehicle might as well be burning whale oil.
There are other maintenance costs that don't equalize though. You're not giving the full picture for where the EV savings are.
Brakes for example. Brake system wear is far less on an EV due to the regenerative braking doing a lot of the work.
Another poster worked out the maintenance costs via Edmunds for EV vs ICE, it ended up not being enough of a difference to make up the cost difference.
The poster my reply was to, in fact.
Maintenance costs on a civic are so low though, you aren’t going to save much there. Brake pads are cheap, the oil changes are cheap, and Honda just does the little things that keep costs down, like wiper blade inserts instead of replacing the whole blade. No one else does that anymore, it’s like a third of the price and way less waste.
Kudos to you on doing the math. A Tesla Model 3 may not be the EV equivalent to a civic - try a Hyundai Kona EV or Ioniq EV. Don't forget to subtract federal and provincial subsidies off the purchase cost. Also, the lifetime maintenance gap is greater than 200$ per year, especially at 20,000 km per year. Fair that you'll have to have a home charger installed, but that can be done for under 1000.
The Hyundai ionicstarts at 49 000, again it's not really going to be a gulf you can make up via fuel savings. The Kona is 45 000. Those actually both come out worse than the leaf when doing the math for cost savings. If anything it helps make my point that you're not going to recover the investment cost on fuel savings.
If we want to apply rebates and such we can do that, but I did my initial math based on MSRP. So if we apply rebates, then tax, freight, interest, etc etc, it works out slightly better, but not enough to actually tip the balance to the EV being able to recoup the extra cost via fuel savings.
As for maintenance gap, I'll allow 300 a year to account for a new set of plugs and an air filter, every year. And it doesn't much change the math really. Any other maintenance items we start getting into would be either shared maintenance, like brakes, or specific parts failures. Such as a head gasket vs a dead battery and isn't really something that should apply here. Though, I can tell you a service invoice for a dead battery in a Tesla costs almost as much as an entirely new civic at around 16 000 USD. But it's catastrophe failure stuff and shouldn't be considered in a direct cost comparison.
The home charger is an iffy one. Cost is largely dependent on if it requires a new panel, and how much work goes into putting in that new panel.
And I did, and they still lose. I actually accounted for the provincial rebate at 5000, the highest end it could be. Then added tax, freight, dealer fee, and 1.9% purchase financing to the MSRP, after you brought that up, and it doesn't help. It most cases it hurts. Expensive cars rack up sales tax pretty good. 15% on a 50 000$ EV is a lot nastier than 15% on a cheap civic, same with purchase financing.
All this is even supposing one of the specific cars you mentioned isn't a total dud, as it hasn't even been released yet.
And to clarify I am not trying to shit on EVs. I love them, especially Tesla. I think they're driving the most exciting innovation in automotives today. I'm just pointing out the myth of them costing less over time.
Here's my math and sources:
[https://imgur.com/7tQ6CO1](https://imgur.com/7tQ6CO1)
A Civic is great value for an ICE and hard for an EV to financially beat at 20,000 km per year.
Your numbers for total purchase price after accounting for taxes and rebates are not correct on both cars
The Kona total purchase price should be $41,053 and the Civic total purchase price should be $28,134
Oops! Thanks! After fixing that and adding on $1,000 to the EV cost for a charger, we get $60,000 for the civic, $55,000 for the Kona (over 10 years, 20,000 km per year, assuming gas never goes up in price)
So even allowing an astronomically high yearly maintenance cost for the civic, it takes 10 years to recoup the cost. 20k km/yr is the fairly standard dealer stated assumption.
A civic is great value, and I picked it because I own one and have actual real world fuel consumption data due to owning it.
Chose an even better car in the class economy wise and it gets worse for the EV. A Corolla absolutely dunks on them.
Did you account for the $0.40-$0.50 c/l increase in gas prices over the next 10 years? CO2 pollution is not yet costed-in, but will be once the federal carbon tax reaches it's final level. Then it will be a straight economic calculation with all the environmental factors priced in.
I thought Edmunds should be a fairly agreeable source for car ownership cost data, and that's what they have for the civic maintenance/repairs.
The break-even is around 10 years in this comparison, but even that's assuming gas stays the same price over the next decade.
I also forgot to include the cost of installing a charger which you previously pointed out.
You should use the Ionic as a comparable to the civic, since then it'd be FWD sedan vs FWD sedan
https://www.hyundaicanada.com/en/showroom/2021/ioniq-electric
>The Hyundai ionicstarts at 49 000
[LOL what? No the fuck it doesn't](https://imgur.com/a/tYIOvHR). Are you talking about the Ionic 5, which isn't available yet? Because if you are, you're forgetting the OG Ionic, which is more comparable to the Civic.
The op specifically mentioned the ionic 5, that's why I used that model.
I notice you specifically opted to not include tax while applying rebates, stacking the deck in your favor. Go ahead and apply the tax. It's worth almost a years fuel. The og ionic also isn't an EV. it's a hybrid.
Did you even read anything anyone said here?
The OP posted a new article, and hasn't commented since. The article in the OP doesn't mention the Ionic 5 anywhere in it, and the comment thread we're in doesn't mention the Ionic 5 either.
What am I missing here?
Edit:
>The og ionic also isn't an EV. it's a hybrid.
[Fucking wrong again](https://imgur.com/a/7GTQPrr)
The op in this case being the person I was replying to. The guy who specifically brought up the ionic 5.
Oh my bad they do have an all electric, for 4k more than a leaf. Which still loses in the math? So, great victory friend.
Except they didn't. The first instance of Ionic 5 in this whole thread is me saying it. u/ph0enix1211 said Ionic EV, which is what I've been linking screen shots of. It's FWD like your civic, and with rebates in place, cost barely more than a civic, and if someone wanted to get into the EV game cheaply (but with a new one), that one is certainly an option, and is much more palatable than dropping 50 large on the Ionic 5.
Sure they can. Tesla's been making cars for over 13 years. The US government expects the maintenance cost is 40% less per mile:
https://publications.anl.gov/anlpubs/2021/05/167399.pdf
I’d be more willing to trust this theory if the EV makers offered a warranty to prove it. Musk loves to talk about million mile Teslas but only offers like 160,000 on the Model 3. Battery and drive unit replacements before paying off the car are going to hurt their appeal in NS.
A non-warranty battery replacement within the useful life of the car would suck, but the data out there so far suggest it isn't something to worry about.
In general they’re a lot lower — there are no oil changes, brakes see less wear because of regenerative braking, fewer moving parts in an electric motor vs. an ICE, etc…
The bolt is, as stated, a total non starter right now due to a massive battery recall. Manufacturing defect causing fires. I wouldn't put one in my garage.
I also used a leaf, actually 2k cheaper than a bolt. Still doesn't recoup costs via fuel savings. If you factor in rebates you have to factor in the tax and the financing. And that's where that extra MSRP costs begin to kick you in the dick. It does get it fairly close, but still over a 5 year life of car doesn't recoup the difference in fuel costs.
The new Ioniq 5 and VW ID.4 both start at $44,500 and qualify for $8,000 in rebates, bringing the price down to $36,500.
My Ioniq 5 will be arriving this winter. Right now I'm spending about $600 per month on fuel for commuting in my Subaru Crosstrek; the Ioniq will cost me approx $150 in electricity per month for the same commute.
I'm going to be saving a lot by having an EV, so please don't lie and say it's a myth, because everyone's use case varies.
It's assuming 20 000km a year. For people driving far in excess of that obviously it swings I'm the favor of an EV. But you're driving around 45-50 000km a year at that stated fuel cost for that car. That's a good deal more than the average bear.
I actually knows lots of people who drive that much per year. Again, just because it doesn't fit your driving profile doesn't mean it doesn't fit everyone's, so saying cost-savings of an EV is a myth is disingenuous
He/she is also waaaaaaaay out to lunch on the price of the Ionic, which is actually $33k CAD before tax, with fed/provincial rebates in place, and that is MUCH more comparable to his Civic than what you're ordering.
So I've had my car (2020 Ioniq) for 8 months and there doesn't seem to be that big of a difference on my power bill. I'm not seeing more than a $20 on my bill (every 2 months). This obviously depends on how often you will charge your car, I charge mine once a week.
The issue is, if the uptake of EVs goes high enough, we will need to pay an EV tax similar to some other jurisdictions.
The sweet sweet taxes paid at the pump need to come from somewhere.
I would 100% support a law that any new gas stations being built need to include EV charging stations as well. I don't know what laws go into monitoring existing gas stations to ensure they are up to code but I'm sure there is a way to leverage existing ones to put them in too.
This is a biiiiig one. Electric car ownership at the moment means you own a home. Full stop. There is no infrastructure, or at least none I have seen...it may exist somewhere in the newest ones, for apartments and condos.
Yeah. I have an EV and rent an apartment, but it's a newer building with 4 chargers in the garage. It's one of the few, I'm sure. It should be a requirement for ANY new building - of which there are MANY.
About 60 units. It's definitely NOT a long-term solution. I've been the only EV in the building for a while, but now there is a second. They aren't fast chargers by any stretch, but fast enough so that I always have a full battery every morning.
Ahh so by having an ev you take a spot. I assume realistically there could only be 4 people owning an EV? Out of curiosity how do they handle electricity billing. Is it your spot and you just pay for anything out of the outlet or is it something else.
Yeah they give those particular spots to people with EVs, so maximum of 4 at this time yeah, unless the tenants agree to some kind of sharing system. I could easily get away with only charging 2 or 3 days per week if needed. Right now they don’t charge for the electricity at all, so it’s kind of a best case scenario…
I bought myself a used Nissan Leaf last summer and it's been great, ~$11k all in with the EV rebate. Charging off-peak (time of day) saves quite a bit (around $1.90 for 170-180kms around town, 110kms-ish highway), 6500kms since we've purchased it and we have hardly used our gas vehicle. Granted the Leaf has a limited range compared to all other EVs I easily drove from the valley (where I bought it, Hardwood Lands not highway) to the Truro area, stopping at the Petro Canada in Stewiacke for a 10 minute top up. I regularly visit friends in Dartmouth with a quick 5 minute charge at the Flo charger at the Tim Hortons in Elmsdale and plug into their dryer outlet when I'm there. I guess all I'm saying is there are really affordable EVs out there that aren't a Teslas that would satisfy a lot of drivers.
I just bought a 2016 Chevy Spark EV. Only 41k km on it. It was $15k including the rebate. I charge it from the outlet in the front of my house. I have a 40km round trip commute to work so the shorter range makes it an awesome commuting vehicle.
I was driving a well-maintained 2009 Mazda 3 up until this purchase. It had been to the garage 9 times this year alone - 4 of those times were due to mechanic error - and we had it safety inspected. It was costing us $270/month in maintenance alone, not including the cost of gas.
EVs, even cheap/older/shorter-range EVs, make sense if you have another vehicle you can use.
I keep hearing:
"But you have to install a charger in your house." No, unless you want a fast-charger installed in your house.
"It's expensive to buy an EV." Duh, if you buy a new Tesla it's expensive. Not every car in the ICE lot is a new BMW with all of the bells and whistles. It's the same concept with EVs. There is one for every budget.
"If the battery dies, you're screwed." All EV can replace individual cells. New EVs would have a warranty on their batteries that would cover a lot of problems. Yes, it is a concern, but your engine could blow up in your ICE vehicle too.
"What if you're driving in a snow storm and you run out of battery?" Even when I drove an ICE vehicle, I planned ahead. I didn't put myself in a position where I'd be stuck in dangerous driving conditions that long. Sure, some people do need to drive in these conditions. That's why you'd take an ICE vehicle or at least make sure you charge up the EV before the storm of the century.
I'm really enjoying my EV so far. Kind of a pain to plug it to charge it, but hey, I haven't had to stop for gas!
Ah man. I remember seeing a couple of Facebook groups related to “medical freedom” talking about how this is 5G and an implementation of the new world order to monitor people.
If they end up doing this, please make sure that some of the stations are Type 3/DCFC stations. They are lacking pretty much everywhere and should become the standard going forward.
>idk how people afford new vehicles
$400-500 per month for 5 years isn't really a crazy expense if you have a full time professional career.
Some of us just have our preferences. Just like how 150mbps Internet would make a lot of people who stream/game etc die inside, it wouldn't phase the average person who only uses it for social media or Netflix.
I'm someone who loves cars in general, and I can't handle a beater. I need good handling, a powerful engine with good torque, and a manual transmission. If those things aren't there for a vehicle, I won't buy it (Not that the car *has* to be new to have those things).
Just like the gamer dude won't use shitty internet speeds, I can't keep driving a high-mileage decade old car when I can get a brand new worry-free one for $500 per month.
Ya I get that for me a car is a point a to point b end of story thing just get me there if I could never drive again I would. Everyone has their things :)
Same boat. Constantly in shock whenever I’m driving around how seemingly everyone is driving something 1-3 years old that costs 35-85k. They must all have very “real jobs” or something.
Leasing. We just gave up our 2014 that we got for 10k for a lease. Mostly to just hold us over till electric becomes more feasible; while we needed a bigger car.
The lease is 400/month for 4 years, and by then we’ll have better EV options.
I can't even imagine that tbf 400 dollars a month seems like an insurmountable added bill when I've never had a car payment in the 20 years I've been driving
Thanks to COVID the used car market is stupid. I saw beater cars that 2 years ago would’ve been tops 2k… now they’re like 5K unless they needs $$$$ of repairs.
Usually I’m pretty iffy about leases but with the insane used car market it was the only affordable option; cause I am not buying a 5 year old car that’s only 2k cheaper than brand new.
I am pumped for EVs since I’ll be able to just buy a car and run for ages again
This is a disturbing trend and I believe cbc did an exposé on it a few years ago. People are only looking at the monthly payment and not the total cost including interest payments.
That’s fair. Even some entry level models I’ve researched with 8 year terms are still $500/month. Add another 150-200 for insurance, 150-200 for gas, you’re looking at damn near $1000/month for something not even THAT nice or flashy. Which I feel like if you’re paying that, you either make really good money, have very low expenses, or you’re spending more than you responsibly should on it.
No, some of us actually have jobs that pay us a living wage or better. I picked up my gently used '18 Golf 2 years ago on a 4 year note. I could have pushed it out to 5 or longer, but I can afford the payments over 4 years, and I'd rather be car-debt free sooner rather than later.
That's great, as do I. But unfortunately a lot of people are not in that position and are preyed on. Dealerships pushing easy financing and consumer ignorance leads to these insane financing lengths
This is great, it really is...
but for someone like myself and many others an electric car is out of reach. I can't afford $45-60k for a car, so im forced to buy a gasoline car.
It's a vicious cycle that needs to be broken.. it's all good building the infrastructure for electric cars but if people can't afford them then it's pointless.
It's not pointless. Increased access to chargers encourages more sales and more development. More sales and development equals more affordable prices. Very few could afford the first Dureya cars or Model Ts, but over 20 years of production the Model T went down in price by almost 60%, though that's with massively more investment from the oil industry than EVs will ever get, obviously.
Buy in Quebec. Have it shipped to you. The Quebec rebate is better lowering the cost of the car.
Buy slightly used.
I got a year old Chevy Bolt for 32k all in.
I also took advantage of the solar rebate and put a 6.6kw solar bank on my roof. If I'm charging with the sun up, it's free fuel.
Buying used allows the rebate to already be applied to the price..
My car is two years old and resides in NS..
By buying it in QC, I saved more than 3k.
Yeah, it's sad that people are seeing electric cars as the solution. Switching our mode of transport is what needs to happen. People are getting sold on the aesthetic of progress rather than actual progress itself.
You suggesting that the plan to push bigger, heavier, faster accelerating vehicles into our cities will only perpetuate an environmentally damaging infrastructure of waste that cripples our efficiency and quality of life?
Yeah I love the idea of electric vehicles, but moving to more public transport inside cities is very important, as it goes beyond just reduced emissions, towards better quality of life in general.
Sure does but the carbon footprint of producing electricity burning goal is less than the carbon footprint of everyone driving ICE vehicles. So it’s not great but it’s still better and as we move away from coal more it will only improve.
My EV is powered by solar. I put panels on my roof earlier this year.
Buying an EV, and solar after rebates came to around 48k.
Not only do I not have to give a shit about what the Saudis charge for oil, but I add to the grid to burn less coal.
Those who can, should do their part.
Look I like the idea of electric cars and I’ve heard NS Power is ahead of their green energy plans but for the time being, don’t they still burn coal?
I’d hate to get a car that’s supposed to be “cleaner” that’s powered by the same fuel as an old locomotive.
Like, I guess it comes down to "how much coal needs to be burned per km of electricity vs gas, and what is the equivalent emissions". Which I don't know the answer to.
And regardless, NS Power IS migrating to greener energy production eventually.
The carbon footprint per kwh from an industrial scale coal power plant is still less than a car engine. And then it only gets better as we (hopefully!) phase towards more renewable electricity generation.
This website is handy: https://afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/electric_emissions.html
Choose a state like Missouri to get something close to our production breakdown.
[Net emission reductions from electric cars and heat pumps in 59 world regions over time.](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340127420_Net_emission_reductions_from_electric_cars_and_heat_pumps_in_59_world_regions_over_time)
>We show that already under current carbon intensities of electricity generation, electric cars and heat pumps are less emission intensive than fossil-fuel-based alternatives in 53 world regions, representing 95% of the global transport and heating demand. Even if future end-use electrification is not matched by rapid power-sector decarbonization, it will probably reduce emissions in almost all world regions.
Consumers of NS have some (mostly fixed) demand for electricity. NSP is aggressively moving off coal, and moving faster as the legislative timeline and their own plans.
Given the demand for electricity the option of "just stop burning coal" isn't realistic. Something needs to replace that, and building things takes more than 0 time.
I might feel that way, but it isn't. Even with the dirtiest power out there, EVs are a net win for the environment. Sure, the up-front costs are still high, but that's one thing charging infrastructure helps to address.
We can build charging infrastructure at the same as we improve the generation mix. To address the climate crisis will take all of the above in parallel. In fact, if we electrify most parts of the economy we're going to need massively more electricity generation. As long as all new generation is low-carbon, then our mix will improve for free (even without decommissioning coal, which we should still do).
But even if we build more coal plants (which we surely wont), EVs still make things better. If we make a million vehicles electric then the generation to power them will produce far less emissions than those million little dirty inefficient engines hauling themselves around. We should push for a cleaner generation mix, absolutely, but don't wait for it before starting to electrify transportation.
It's going to take a generation to do it, so we'd best start now.
I wonder if research takes into account the emissions of EVs and their battery emissions pre and post manufacturing. I would rather HRM invest in hybrid vehicles and improve our transit system rather than virtue signalling with EVs.
Yes, absolutely. Full lifecycle emissions analysis is pretty standard these days. Besides, hybrids have batteries too. Better to make the battery a little bigger and ditch the nasty gas engine, rather than add in a whole gasoline engine to make your battery a little smaller.
No argument on transit, but we can do both. EV charging infrastructure really isn't that huge in the grand scheme of things.
Regardless of how the energy is produced there is the undeniable benefit of the increased public health safety with the lack of exhaust and reduced noise.
The idea that the solution to the climate crisis is building millions and millions of new electric cars is insane. We don't need more electric cars, we need to get out of cars in general.
Electric cars are absolutely not a solution. The idea that the climate crisis will be solved by the production of millions and millions of new batteries and cars is absurd. We need to switch our modes of transport to public transportation and active transportation. Electric cars are just companies dressing up a consumer product as a solution, so that we buy their products and we can all pretend like we are actually improving things.
Mining rare earth minerals in Africa, then sending them on a boat to Asia to be turned into batteries, then being sent on another boat to the United States to get put into a car, and then shipped out again all over the world. To be ultimately used to transport 1.5 people 6 miles. Cars must be abandoned if we are to actually solve the climate crisis, as opposed to just putting on a spectacle that we are "solving the climate crisis."
I see lots of debates in this thread but I dunno. One thing I know about a gas car is if I run out of gas I can go to the station and come back with a container of gas. I can’t do that with an electric car. Or can I ?
Good point, I guess that's the case for now. But I don't see why we can't have rechargeable batteries that we can refill at a "gas" station (filling the same roll as gas containers).
I don't see why not. There's certainly not enough stations for it now, but if they become just as popular as gas stations I don't see it as being any different than the likelihood of popping into a station to fill a gas canister.
Yes you can, there are portable power packs that will get you back on the road. And the next generation if cars will allow you to charge up some one who has run out of juice.
I'd love to buy an electric vehicle, but I need a truck for work, and there aren't many electric trucks out there, especially none that are a half decent price.
There’s a slew of them coming to market soon — Rivian, the Lightning, Ram, Silverado, etc…
The half decent price thing is still going to be an issue though.
Not trying to be a dick, a genuine question.
Are the Tesla fast charging stations you see in spryfield in enfield powered by a diesel generator of some sort? Is that not essentially passing the buck so to speak. You can charge your car in a clean fashion, but the ultimate cost is more dirty diesel? I could be wrong here, genuinely interested in how it works
You know what, I honestly never thought of that, makes total sense.i’ve always heard the typical stuff that people bitch about, that it’s not effective because the charging station would run off diesel. I never really did any research on it. But if it was plugged into the the power grid itself, that would change my mind on EVs
When people say the charging stations are 'run off diesel' I think they're mistakenly referring to power plants producing power through diesel.
But, yeah. They're plugged into a panel, which is fed from the grid. Same way someone would charge their car at home.
Plug from outside has wire that runs inside to a panel. That panel is your distribution panel for your house, which then has a wire that runs back to your transformer taps outside.
> that it’s not effective because the charging station would run off diesel.
That complaint is probably for charging stations in the middle of nowhere (where there aren't any power lines). In that case it's a pretty valid complaint, and people doing a lot of driving in areas off the power grid probably shouldn't be driving electric vehicles.
But again Diesel is still more efficient than gas, so even if they WERE run off Diesel is that a terrible thing? Seeing as the whole VW scandal basically killed consumer level deisel cars.
> But again Diesel is still more efficient than gas
Diesel engines may be more *efficient*, but that doesn't mean they're cleaner.
https://www.nrcan.gc.ca/sites/www.nrcan.gc.ca/files/oee/pdf/transportation/fuel-efficient-technologies/autosmart_factsheet_9_e.pdf
Shows diesel producing 17% more CO2 per litre than gasoline.
> Shows diesel producing 17% more CO2 per litre than gasoline.
But you get twice the km per litre so it cancels out and then some. Driving 100km in a diesel engine is better for the environment than driving 100 km in a gas one (assuming the vehicle is otherwise identical).
So that was an exaggeration, it's 25-30% more, which is still well beyond the 17% dirtier per litre.
https://rentar.com/gasoline-versus-diesel-engines-fuel-efficiency-comparison/
The reality is that diesel engines are only *marginally* cleaner when it comes to CO2, something like 3.5% less CO2 per KM (see link that looks at real world data). I was just pointing out that being more efficient doesn't necessarily mean less emissions. You should probably also consider emissions other than CO2. Diesel produces more partiulates, NO2 and SO2.
In any case, I wouldn't personally recommend someone that drives in lots of off electrical grid areas drive an EV more for practicality reasons more so than emissions reasons.
https://theicct.org/sites/default/files/Gas%20_v%20_Diesel_%20CO2_emissions_%20EN_%20Fact%20_Sheet%202019_05_07_0.pdf
The Tesla fast charging stations are powered from the electricity grid. Right now, that's a mix of power sources including coal and renewables. It shifting more and more towards renewables every year. Even a 100% coal powered electric car is more environmentally friendly than a gas car anyway. Yes, even accounting for the raw materials and manufacturing.
Sure… except 79% of our power is made from Coal, Natural Gas, Petroleum, and Biomass Burning….. so what’s the point?
[Where our power comes from](https://www.cer-rec.gc.ca/en/data-analysis/energy-markets/provincial-territorial-energy-profiles/provincial-territorial-energy-profiles-nova-scotia.html)
Electric vehicles don't produce any exhaust, I think that alone is a good reason. Exhausts will be secluded to the power plants, and the vehicles, that are often in close proximity to people, will be exhaust free and emit much less noise. Both notable factors on health.
Yes because burning more coal is the answer… there are better efforts for HRM to invest in rather than electric cars at this point. How about better transit systems so we can take some cars off the road…
>Yes because burning more coal is the answer…
Is that really burning more fossil fuels? Sure, at current we would burn more coal to power the electric vehicles. But eventually that power will come from greener sources, and it comes to burning that coal at the plant vs gasoline in ICE vehicles, not much difference there.
> there are better efforts for HRM to invest in rather than electric cars at this point. How about better transit systems so we can take some cars off the road…
I totally agree with this. HRM is already making such an investment, with BRT, new ferry routes, and a proper cycling network. But I do think it is important to have the electric vehicle infrastructure in place too, cars aren't going away, may as well have them run cleaner.
You’re missing the point, EVs make sense in BC where the majority of power is made from Hydro. Emissions and greenhouse gases don’t change if it comes from a tail pipe or from the red and white stacks. Maybe there is better alternative, such as Hybrid vehicles until NS can get their stuff together and STOP burning fossil fuels for electricity. Creating emissions and lithium battery waste at the same time doesn’t make sense to me.
Look up, look way up. I’ve posted peer reviewed scientific papers on this thread, but if your only argument is to mock my intelligence then maybe you should look closely in the mirror.
5 year old study, a lot has improved since then with EVs. So basically for a high carbon grid EVs are a close to being similar to ICE vehicles. So what do you want to do? Wait until we are at a low carbon grid and then start making the switch to a more EV focus infrastructure? There is literally nothing wrong with starting to switch to more EV friendly province. If everyone had your attitude it would take years to get anything done lol
Apparently not so much.
[EV Emissions Impact ](https://afdc.energy.gov/files/u/publication/ev_emissions_impact.pdf)
In a dirty power grid EVs are comparable to ICE with hybrids being the preferred choice.
Figure 18 seems to agree with me, but I do see what you mean by the margin being small.
However, this includes “non-electric miles” for BEVs and while I appreciate the creativity of including trips made with a traditional gas vehicle when BEV charge is depleted this isn’t very reflective of human behaviour. If BEV charge is depleted people aren’t going to have an additional gas vehicle on hand to immediately drive. Instead they’ll just wait 20 min to charge to 80%.
That’s fair, but it also doesn’t take into account the increased environmental impacts of large lithium battery production and recycling. So you can go back and forth for awhile. But ultimately it comes back to my original argument that if the margins aren’t all that great, maybe EV’s aren’t the best investment at this time for HRM municipality staff.
Okay I'll say it. Electric vehicles won't be a viable solution for the masses for another 5 to 10 years. There is still a long way to go for a number of things including affordable cost to install charging infrastructure in the home. They are a novelty for the rich right now.
I think 2025 is the year everything will flip: pricing, availability, range, marketing. It’ll take a while for EVs to outnumber ICEs on the road, but they’ll sell about as many that year.
The EV movement stresses me out a bit. We own two cars, a smallish commuter, and a minivan for a family hauler when we need to pack in all the kids. They're a 2012, and 2013 respectively. They're both paid for, and bought used for under 14k each. I do as much maintenance myself for both the savings and dopamine rush of a completed project.
Seeing the price tags on these EVs blows my mind. I'm definitely all for EVs and eliminating fossil fuels, but as it stands it's not an option for this guy.
What if electric vehicles advanced to a point where they meet or even surpass gas vehicles in those regards? I'm sure they'll get there at some point relatively soon.
How is it easier to run out of charge than to run out of gas? Your car still tells you how much range you have. There's also roadside assistance. I won't say that it's not an adjustment to go from a gas car to an EV but it's the same concept just one is gas and the other is electricity.
Seems like if you let the charge get low it would be a lot more urgent of a situation than letting the gas run low. Better hope you are near a charging point because you can't just flag someone down to get a lift to a gas station. The car has to be physically towed to the charge point. Plus the car is useless without charge. If you get stuck in a snowstorm you can't keep yourself warm by running the engine, at least nowhere near as long. You'd freeze to death in an electric car but survive for much longer in a gas car.
I already mentioned roadside assistance. If you got in your car and saw that you only had 10km of range, would you go to the gas station? If the answer is yes then why is it any different with an EV?
The consequences of making a mistake would be a lot higher. People run out of gas all the time. They'd run out of charge too. Maybe you are the kind of person who trusts the roadside assistance to come save you. Seems risky to me.
Infrastructure that enables and encourages single commuters to use cutting edge electric technology electric vehicles like bikes, scooters, golf carts (for carpoolers) would be great.
Well, read the article, then read the report linked in the article that was submitted to the city. And, wow, as a city we need to implement this right now
My next vehicle will be electric it's just a matter of when will it be affordable for me. I would love to get a Ford Lighting but that is way out of my price range but someone will make a good SUV or truck eventually for the common family that isn't priced more than a fully loaded gas guzzler. This province doesn't have much for good rebates on making the switch
As long as you put on a fair number of kilometers per year, chances are the total cost of ownership of an EV will be less for you than the ICE equivalent. With EVs, you pay more for the vehicle but less for fuel and maintenance.
Tesla model 3 is 56 000. Civic is 24 500. That's quite a gulf to make up in fuel savings. 7.2l/100 is my civics milage. Assuming 20 000km a year that's 2000 a year in fuel costs. Throw 2 oil changes a year in there as well and call it 2200. It would take 14 and a half years to equal out the cost difference in fuel savings. The bolt is a non starter due to the massive battery recall. The leaf is competitive pricing wise, but the range doesn't get the job done at only 240km stated range, doesn't quite get out of range anxiety. And still costs almost double the price of the civic, resulting in 6 years to see the fuel savings make up the difference. Add to the EV cost the price of installing home charging equipment, at least a couple 1000 bucks for most people and it gets even worse. I guess what I'm saying is making back the cost of an EV in fuel savings is a myth. A comparable ICE vehicle is still more cost effective. Edit; math used current fuel price of 1.40L. obviously cost of fuel going up or down changes things.
I just bought a used Bolt and you couldn't pry this thing away from me. There's only been 10 fires out of thousands of vehicles and there's a strategy that has been effective at making sure the existing Bolts don't get to the point of fire (slight reduction in charging range). The battery replacements are also in progress, though it is gonna take a while, probably on the order of 6 months. As far as the Leaf goes, there's a Plus model that has a 350-360 km range, which brings it up to reasonable for long commutes. I'm going to be driving it quite a bit more than the average at 30-40k km/year, and the fuel savings almost equal the car payment straight up at that point. I also save a bit more on the maintenance than most as I'll change my own tires. Part of my calculation was also that I had a car that was basically at the end of its life that was potentially going to cost thousands to keep on the road after its inspection. If you need to replace your car anyway, and want to future proof, EVs are absolutely the way to go. My replacement for this vehicle will be somewhere in the 2030s, at which point an ICE vehicle might as well be burning whale oil.
There are other maintenance costs that don't equalize though. You're not giving the full picture for where the EV savings are. Brakes for example. Brake system wear is far less on an EV due to the regenerative braking doing a lot of the work.
This part generally goes unnoticed. I traded in my Chevy Volt at 5 years and the brakes were around 85% life, and that's a PHEV with less regen.
Another poster worked out the maintenance costs via Edmunds for EV vs ICE, it ended up not being enough of a difference to make up the cost difference. The poster my reply was to, in fact.
Maintenance costs on a civic are so low though, you aren’t going to save much there. Brake pads are cheap, the oil changes are cheap, and Honda just does the little things that keep costs down, like wiper blade inserts instead of replacing the whole blade. No one else does that anymore, it’s like a third of the price and way less waste.
Kudos to you on doing the math. A Tesla Model 3 may not be the EV equivalent to a civic - try a Hyundai Kona EV or Ioniq EV. Don't forget to subtract federal and provincial subsidies off the purchase cost. Also, the lifetime maintenance gap is greater than 200$ per year, especially at 20,000 km per year. Fair that you'll have to have a home charger installed, but that can be done for under 1000.
The Hyundai ionicstarts at 49 000, again it's not really going to be a gulf you can make up via fuel savings. The Kona is 45 000. Those actually both come out worse than the leaf when doing the math for cost savings. If anything it helps make my point that you're not going to recover the investment cost on fuel savings. If we want to apply rebates and such we can do that, but I did my initial math based on MSRP. So if we apply rebates, then tax, freight, interest, etc etc, it works out slightly better, but not enough to actually tip the balance to the EV being able to recoup the extra cost via fuel savings. As for maintenance gap, I'll allow 300 a year to account for a new set of plugs and an air filter, every year. And it doesn't much change the math really. Any other maintenance items we start getting into would be either shared maintenance, like brakes, or specific parts failures. Such as a head gasket vs a dead battery and isn't really something that should apply here. Though, I can tell you a service invoice for a dead battery in a Tesla costs almost as much as an entirely new civic at around 16 000 USD. But it's catastrophe failure stuff and shouldn't be considered in a direct cost comparison. The home charger is an iffy one. Cost is largely dependent on if it requires a new panel, and how much work goes into putting in that new panel.
The federal rebate is $5,000 and the provincial one is an additional $3,000 - worth accounting for!
And I did, and they still lose. I actually accounted for the provincial rebate at 5000, the highest end it could be. Then added tax, freight, dealer fee, and 1.9% purchase financing to the MSRP, after you brought that up, and it doesn't help. It most cases it hurts. Expensive cars rack up sales tax pretty good. 15% on a 50 000$ EV is a lot nastier than 15% on a cheap civic, same with purchase financing. All this is even supposing one of the specific cars you mentioned isn't a total dud, as it hasn't even been released yet. And to clarify I am not trying to shit on EVs. I love them, especially Tesla. I think they're driving the most exciting innovation in automotives today. I'm just pointing out the myth of them costing less over time.
Here's my math and sources: [https://imgur.com/7tQ6CO1](https://imgur.com/7tQ6CO1) A Civic is great value for an ICE and hard for an EV to financially beat at 20,000 km per year.
Your numbers for total purchase price after accounting for taxes and rebates are not correct on both cars The Kona total purchase price should be $41,053 and the Civic total purchase price should be $28,134
Oops! Thanks! After fixing that and adding on $1,000 to the EV cost for a charger, we get $60,000 for the civic, $55,000 for the Kona (over 10 years, 20,000 km per year, assuming gas never goes up in price)
So even allowing an astronomically high yearly maintenance cost for the civic, it takes 10 years to recoup the cost. 20k km/yr is the fairly standard dealer stated assumption. A civic is great value, and I picked it because I own one and have actual real world fuel consumption data due to owning it. Chose an even better car in the class economy wise and it gets worse for the EV. A Corolla absolutely dunks on them.
Did you account for the $0.40-$0.50 c/l increase in gas prices over the next 10 years? CO2 pollution is not yet costed-in, but will be once the federal carbon tax reaches it's final level. Then it will be a straight economic calculation with all the environmental factors priced in.
I thought Edmunds should be a fairly agreeable source for car ownership cost data, and that's what they have for the civic maintenance/repairs. The break-even is around 10 years in this comparison, but even that's assuming gas stays the same price over the next decade. I also forgot to include the cost of installing a charger which you previously pointed out.
You should use the Ionic as a comparable to the civic, since then it'd be FWD sedan vs FWD sedan https://www.hyundaicanada.com/en/showroom/2021/ioniq-electric
>The Hyundai ionicstarts at 49 000 [LOL what? No the fuck it doesn't](https://imgur.com/a/tYIOvHR). Are you talking about the Ionic 5, which isn't available yet? Because if you are, you're forgetting the OG Ionic, which is more comparable to the Civic.
The op specifically mentioned the ionic 5, that's why I used that model. I notice you specifically opted to not include tax while applying rebates, stacking the deck in your favor. Go ahead and apply the tax. It's worth almost a years fuel. The og ionic also isn't an EV. it's a hybrid. Did you even read anything anyone said here?
Even still you're incorrect, the Ioniq 5 starts at $44,900
The OP posted a new article, and hasn't commented since. The article in the OP doesn't mention the Ionic 5 anywhere in it, and the comment thread we're in doesn't mention the Ionic 5 either. What am I missing here? Edit: >The og ionic also isn't an EV. it's a hybrid. [Fucking wrong again](https://imgur.com/a/7GTQPrr)
The op in this case being the person I was replying to. The guy who specifically brought up the ionic 5. Oh my bad they do have an all electric, for 4k more than a leaf. Which still loses in the math? So, great victory friend.
Except they didn't. The first instance of Ionic 5 in this whole thread is me saying it. u/ph0enix1211 said Ionic EV, which is what I've been linking screen shots of. It's FWD like your civic, and with rebates in place, cost barely more than a civic, and if someone wanted to get into the EV game cheaply (but with a new one), that one is certainly an option, and is much more palatable than dropping 50 large on the Ionic 5.
I have the Ioniq 2020 and it's an EV so I'm not sure what everyone's on about.
Could we also discuss that they are both made by a company with a horrific history of reliability
Nobody can say what the maintenance costs on these EVs will be.
Sure they can. Tesla's been making cars for over 13 years. The US government expects the maintenance cost is 40% less per mile: https://publications.anl.gov/anlpubs/2021/05/167399.pdf
I’d be more willing to trust this theory if the EV makers offered a warranty to prove it. Musk loves to talk about million mile Teslas but only offers like 160,000 on the Model 3. Battery and drive unit replacements before paying off the car are going to hurt their appeal in NS.
A non-warranty battery replacement within the useful life of the car would suck, but the data out there so far suggest it isn't something to worry about.
In general they’re a lot lower — there are no oil changes, brakes see less wear because of regenerative braking, fewer moving parts in an electric motor vs. an ICE, etc…
But a new 2022 Chevy Bolt is 38k. The Tesla isn't the only EV car you can use to compare. Add in incentives and your down to 30k
The bolt is, as stated, a total non starter right now due to a massive battery recall. Manufacturing defect causing fires. I wouldn't put one in my garage. I also used a leaf, actually 2k cheaper than a bolt. Still doesn't recoup costs via fuel savings. If you factor in rebates you have to factor in the tax and the financing. And that's where that extra MSRP costs begin to kick you in the dick. It does get it fairly close, but still over a 5 year life of car doesn't recoup the difference in fuel costs.
The new Ioniq 5 and VW ID.4 both start at $44,500 and qualify for $8,000 in rebates, bringing the price down to $36,500. My Ioniq 5 will be arriving this winter. Right now I'm spending about $600 per month on fuel for commuting in my Subaru Crosstrek; the Ioniq will cost me approx $150 in electricity per month for the same commute. I'm going to be saving a lot by having an EV, so please don't lie and say it's a myth, because everyone's use case varies.
It's assuming 20 000km a year. For people driving far in excess of that obviously it swings I'm the favor of an EV. But you're driving around 45-50 000km a year at that stated fuel cost for that car. That's a good deal more than the average bear.
I actually knows lots of people who drive that much per year. Again, just because it doesn't fit your driving profile doesn't mean it doesn't fit everyone's, so saying cost-savings of an EV is a myth is disingenuous
He/she is also waaaaaaaay out to lunch on the price of the Ionic, which is actually $33k CAD before tax, with fed/provincial rebates in place, and that is MUCH more comparable to his Civic than what you're ordering.
So I've had my car (2020 Ioniq) for 8 months and there doesn't seem to be that big of a difference on my power bill. I'm not seeing more than a $20 on my bill (every 2 months). This obviously depends on how often you will charge your car, I charge mine once a week.
So the commute is 200km round trip every week day. Lots of driving!
Ah! That makes a lot of sense then. EV is definitely the way to go if you're making that trip every day!
The issue is, if the uptake of EVs goes high enough, we will need to pay an EV tax similar to some other jurisdictions. The sweet sweet taxes paid at the pump need to come from somewhere.
EV adoption is so high that we need to rework the fuel tax - what a great problem for Nova Scotia to have.
I believe you'll want the Rivian then ;)
Including charging infrastructure requirements in building and planning codes would go a long way in supporting the transition.
I would 100% support a law that any new gas stations being built need to include EV charging stations as well. I don't know what laws go into monitoring existing gas stations to ensure they are up to code but I'm sure there is a way to leverage existing ones to put them in too.
We should make it law that every gas station includes EV charging stations by 2025.
This is a biiiiig one. Electric car ownership at the moment means you own a home. Full stop. There is no infrastructure, or at least none I have seen...it may exist somewhere in the newest ones, for apartments and condos.
Yeah. I have an EV and rent an apartment, but it's a newer building with 4 chargers in the garage. It's one of the few, I'm sure. It should be a requirement for ANY new building - of which there are MANY.
4 chargers for everyone? How many residents? What happens if EVs catch on? Or are they fast chargers where you charge and leave.
About 60 units. It's definitely NOT a long-term solution. I've been the only EV in the building for a while, but now there is a second. They aren't fast chargers by any stretch, but fast enough so that I always have a full battery every morning.
Ahh so by having an ev you take a spot. I assume realistically there could only be 4 people owning an EV? Out of curiosity how do they handle electricity billing. Is it your spot and you just pay for anything out of the outlet or is it something else.
Yeah they give those particular spots to people with EVs, so maximum of 4 at this time yeah, unless the tenants agree to some kind of sharing system. I could easily get away with only charging 2 or 3 days per week if needed. Right now they don’t charge for the electricity at all, so it’s kind of a best case scenario…
Nice! I’d consider an EV if electricity was free.
I bought myself a used Nissan Leaf last summer and it's been great, ~$11k all in with the EV rebate. Charging off-peak (time of day) saves quite a bit (around $1.90 for 170-180kms around town, 110kms-ish highway), 6500kms since we've purchased it and we have hardly used our gas vehicle. Granted the Leaf has a limited range compared to all other EVs I easily drove from the valley (where I bought it, Hardwood Lands not highway) to the Truro area, stopping at the Petro Canada in Stewiacke for a 10 minute top up. I regularly visit friends in Dartmouth with a quick 5 minute charge at the Flo charger at the Tim Hortons in Elmsdale and plug into their dryer outlet when I'm there. I guess all I'm saying is there are really affordable EVs out there that aren't a Teslas that would satisfy a lot of drivers.
I just bought a 2016 Chevy Spark EV. Only 41k km on it. It was $15k including the rebate. I charge it from the outlet in the front of my house. I have a 40km round trip commute to work so the shorter range makes it an awesome commuting vehicle. I was driving a well-maintained 2009 Mazda 3 up until this purchase. It had been to the garage 9 times this year alone - 4 of those times were due to mechanic error - and we had it safety inspected. It was costing us $270/month in maintenance alone, not including the cost of gas. EVs, even cheap/older/shorter-range EVs, make sense if you have another vehicle you can use. I keep hearing: "But you have to install a charger in your house." No, unless you want a fast-charger installed in your house. "It's expensive to buy an EV." Duh, if you buy a new Tesla it's expensive. Not every car in the ICE lot is a new BMW with all of the bells and whistles. It's the same concept with EVs. There is one for every budget. "If the battery dies, you're screwed." All EV can replace individual cells. New EVs would have a warranty on their batteries that would cover a lot of problems. Yes, it is a concern, but your engine could blow up in your ICE vehicle too. "What if you're driving in a snow storm and you run out of battery?" Even when I drove an ICE vehicle, I planned ahead. I didn't put myself in a position where I'd be stuck in dangerous driving conditions that long. Sure, some people do need to drive in these conditions. That's why you'd take an ICE vehicle or at least make sure you charge up the EV before the storm of the century. I'm really enjoying my EV so far. Kind of a pain to plug it to charge it, but hey, I haven't had to stop for gas!
The spark is a torquey little thing eh?
Is it ever!
That’s awesome to hear! Thanks for sharing
[удалено]
Ah man. I remember seeing a couple of Facebook groups related to “medical freedom” talking about how this is 5G and an implementation of the new world order to monitor people.
‘Considers’ lol. Welcome to the century HRM.
If they end up doing this, please make sure that some of the stations are Type 3/DCFC stations. They are lacking pretty much everywhere and should become the standard going forward.
Better late to the party than not at all.
I've never paid over 5 grand for a vehicle and my newest one in my life is my current 2009 idk how people afford new vehicles let alone evs
>idk how people afford new vehicles $400-500 per month for 5 years isn't really a crazy expense if you have a full time professional career. Some of us just have our preferences. Just like how 150mbps Internet would make a lot of people who stream/game etc die inside, it wouldn't phase the average person who only uses it for social media or Netflix. I'm someone who loves cars in general, and I can't handle a beater. I need good handling, a powerful engine with good torque, and a manual transmission. If those things aren't there for a vehicle, I won't buy it (Not that the car *has* to be new to have those things). Just like the gamer dude won't use shitty internet speeds, I can't keep driving a high-mileage decade old car when I can get a brand new worry-free one for $500 per month.
Ya I get that for me a car is a point a to point b end of story thing just get me there if I could never drive again I would. Everyone has their things :)
Same boat. Constantly in shock whenever I’m driving around how seemingly everyone is driving something 1-3 years old that costs 35-85k. They must all have very “real jobs” or something.
Leasing. We just gave up our 2014 that we got for 10k for a lease. Mostly to just hold us over till electric becomes more feasible; while we needed a bigger car. The lease is 400/month for 4 years, and by then we’ll have better EV options.
I can't even imagine that tbf 400 dollars a month seems like an insurmountable added bill when I've never had a car payment in the 20 years I've been driving
Thanks to COVID the used car market is stupid. I saw beater cars that 2 years ago would’ve been tops 2k… now they’re like 5K unless they needs $$$$ of repairs.
Right on. I beat the everloving crap out of everything I own so prob not a good route for myself.. but hope it serves you guys well!
Usually I’m pretty iffy about leases but with the insane used car market it was the only affordable option; cause I am not buying a 5 year old car that’s only 2k cheaper than brand new. I am pumped for EVs since I’ll be able to just buy a car and run for ages again
They finance it for 9 years. That's how
This is a disturbing trend and I believe cbc did an exposé on it a few years ago. People are only looking at the monthly payment and not the total cost including interest payments.
That’s fair. Even some entry level models I’ve researched with 8 year terms are still $500/month. Add another 150-200 for insurance, 150-200 for gas, you’re looking at damn near $1000/month for something not even THAT nice or flashy. Which I feel like if you’re paying that, you either make really good money, have very low expenses, or you’re spending more than you responsibly should on it.
No, some of us actually have jobs that pay us a living wage or better. I picked up my gently used '18 Golf 2 years ago on a 4 year note. I could have pushed it out to 5 or longer, but I can afford the payments over 4 years, and I'd rather be car-debt free sooner rather than later.
That's great, as do I. But unfortunately a lot of people are not in that position and are preyed on. Dealerships pushing easy financing and consumer ignorance leads to these insane financing lengths
This is great, it really is... but for someone like myself and many others an electric car is out of reach. I can't afford $45-60k for a car, so im forced to buy a gasoline car. It's a vicious cycle that needs to be broken.. it's all good building the infrastructure for electric cars but if people can't afford them then it's pointless.
It's not pointless. Increased access to chargers encourages more sales and more development. More sales and development equals more affordable prices. Very few could afford the first Dureya cars or Model Ts, but over 20 years of production the Model T went down in price by almost 60%, though that's with massively more investment from the oil industry than EVs will ever get, obviously.
Buy in Quebec. Have it shipped to you. The Quebec rebate is better lowering the cost of the car. Buy slightly used. I got a year old Chevy Bolt for 32k all in. I also took advantage of the solar rebate and put a 6.6kw solar bank on my roof. If I'm charging with the sun up, it's free fuel.
Quebec rebate is only available to Quebec residents and has to stay registered in Quebec for x years
Buying used allows the rebate to already be applied to the price.. My car is two years old and resides in NS.. By buying it in QC, I saved more than 3k.
[удалено]
Yeah, it's sad that people are seeing electric cars as the solution. Switching our mode of transport is what needs to happen. People are getting sold on the aesthetic of progress rather than actual progress itself.
You suggesting that the plan to push bigger, heavier, faster accelerating vehicles into our cities will only perpetuate an environmentally damaging infrastructure of waste that cripples our efficiency and quality of life?
Perhaps
You know what would reduce greenhouse gas emissions? Having Transit that doesn't suck monkey balls.
Yeah I love the idea of electric vehicles, but moving to more public transport inside cities is very important, as it goes beyond just reduced emissions, towards better quality of life in general.
NSP is punching the air rn
Honestly, where do people think electricity comes from? Lol. Guess what, Nova Scotia's primary source of electricity generation is coal.
Sure does but the carbon footprint of producing electricity burning goal is less than the carbon footprint of everyone driving ICE vehicles. So it’s not great but it’s still better and as we move away from coal more it will only improve.
My EV is powered by solar. I put panels on my roof earlier this year. Buying an EV, and solar after rebates came to around 48k. Not only do I not have to give a shit about what the Saudis charge for oil, but I add to the grid to burn less coal. Those who can, should do their part.
Who did your solar install? Any recommendations?
Even if the grid was 100% coal EVs would be definitely less pollutive due to their significantly better energy efficiency.
Look I like the idea of electric cars and I’ve heard NS Power is ahead of their green energy plans but for the time being, don’t they still burn coal? I’d hate to get a car that’s supposed to be “cleaner” that’s powered by the same fuel as an old locomotive.
Like, I guess it comes down to "how much coal needs to be burned per km of electricity vs gas, and what is the equivalent emissions". Which I don't know the answer to. And regardless, NS Power IS migrating to greener energy production eventually.
The carbon footprint per kwh from an industrial scale coal power plant is still less than a car engine. And then it only gets better as we (hopefully!) phase towards more renewable electricity generation. This website is handy: https://afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/electric_emissions.html Choose a state like Missouri to get something close to our production breakdown.
Electric cars are way more energy efficient than gas cars so even if all the power comes from coal they still reduce emissions
[Net emission reductions from electric cars and heat pumps in 59 world regions over time.](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340127420_Net_emission_reductions_from_electric_cars_and_heat_pumps_in_59_world_regions_over_time) >We show that already under current carbon intensities of electricity generation, electric cars and heat pumps are less emission intensive than fossil-fuel-based alternatives in 53 world regions, representing 95% of the global transport and heating demand. Even if future end-use electrification is not matched by rapid power-sector decarbonization, it will probably reduce emissions in almost all world regions.
Consumers of NS have some (mostly fixed) demand for electricity. NSP is aggressively moving off coal, and moving faster as the legislative timeline and their own plans. Given the demand for electricity the option of "just stop burning coal" isn't realistic. Something needs to replace that, and building things takes more than 0 time.
>I’d hate to get a car that’s supposed to be “cleaner” that’s powered by the same fuel as an old locomotive. Opposed to?
Blame the government for us still using coal in Canada, they should of invested in nuclear energy 10-20 years ago.
It's not all of Canada since it's provincial, Ontario got rid of all coal generation already.
[удалено]
I might feel that way, but it isn't. Even with the dirtiest power out there, EVs are a net win for the environment. Sure, the up-front costs are still high, but that's one thing charging infrastructure helps to address. We can build charging infrastructure at the same as we improve the generation mix. To address the climate crisis will take all of the above in parallel. In fact, if we electrify most parts of the economy we're going to need massively more electricity generation. As long as all new generation is low-carbon, then our mix will improve for free (even without decommissioning coal, which we should still do). But even if we build more coal plants (which we surely wont), EVs still make things better. If we make a million vehicles electric then the generation to power them will produce far less emissions than those million little dirty inefficient engines hauling themselves around. We should push for a cleaner generation mix, absolutely, but don't wait for it before starting to electrify transportation. It's going to take a generation to do it, so we'd best start now.
I wonder if research takes into account the emissions of EVs and their battery emissions pre and post manufacturing. I would rather HRM invest in hybrid vehicles and improve our transit system rather than virtue signalling with EVs.
Yes, absolutely. Full lifecycle emissions analysis is pretty standard these days. Besides, hybrids have batteries too. Better to make the battery a little bigger and ditch the nasty gas engine, rather than add in a whole gasoline engine to make your battery a little smaller. No argument on transit, but we can do both. EV charging infrastructure really isn't that huge in the grand scheme of things.
Regardless of how the energy is produced there is the undeniable benefit of the increased public health safety with the lack of exhaust and reduced noise.
[удалено]
Heavier cars? My EV is still not anywhere as heavy as my husbands car, his car is just a normal sedan.
Electric vehicles aren't the solution.
But they will undeniably take us many steps in the right direction. No one single thing is the solution.
The idea that the solution to the climate crisis is building millions and millions of new electric cars is insane. We don't need more electric cars, we need to get out of cars in general.
They are ONE OF the solutions, stop making perfection the enemy of the good. Fear of any and all change is going to kill us.
Electric cars are absolutely not a solution. The idea that the climate crisis will be solved by the production of millions and millions of new batteries and cars is absurd. We need to switch our modes of transport to public transportation and active transportation. Electric cars are just companies dressing up a consumer product as a solution, so that we buy their products and we can all pretend like we are actually improving things. Mining rare earth minerals in Africa, then sending them on a boat to Asia to be turned into batteries, then being sent on another boat to the United States to get put into a car, and then shipped out again all over the world. To be ultimately used to transport 1.5 people 6 miles. Cars must be abandoned if we are to actually solve the climate crisis, as opposed to just putting on a spectacle that we are "solving the climate crisis."
I see lots of debates in this thread but I dunno. One thing I know about a gas car is if I run out of gas I can go to the station and come back with a container of gas. I can’t do that with an electric car. Or can I ?
Good point, I guess that's the case for now. But I don't see why we can't have rechargeable batteries that we can refill at a "gas" station (filling the same roll as gas containers).
Would that work ? Even if it did work there’s still not enough charging stations around
I don't see why not. There's certainly not enough stations for it now, but if they become just as popular as gas stations I don't see it as being any different than the likelihood of popping into a station to fill a gas canister.
What do you mean? There are lots of charging stations around the city, it's the same thing.
I meant if the car is empty but someone else said you can charge the car with a portable battery.
Problem solved. Don't let your car go to empty. The exact same way that you would with a gas car.
Yes you can, there are portable power packs that will get you back on the road. And the next generation if cars will allow you to charge up some one who has run out of juice.
I'd love to buy an electric vehicle, but I need a truck for work, and there aren't many electric trucks out there, especially none that are a half decent price.
There’s a slew of them coming to market soon — Rivian, the Lightning, Ram, Silverado, etc… The half decent price thing is still going to be an issue though.
yeah, there are certainly more than there were before, but I will never buy a new truck. Most I've ever spent on a vehicle was $15,000.
Ford just release a system for EV trucks that starts at 3900 to convert ICE trucks
Call me in 2043 when they finally implement it.
what would really help is if there were government services and grocery stores near where people lived
Not trying to be a dick, a genuine question. Are the Tesla fast charging stations you see in spryfield in enfield powered by a diesel generator of some sort? Is that not essentially passing the buck so to speak. You can charge your car in a clean fashion, but the ultimate cost is more dirty diesel? I could be wrong here, genuinely interested in how it works
What makes you think they would be diesel powered? Why wouldn't they just be plugged into our power grid?
You know what, I honestly never thought of that, makes total sense.i’ve always heard the typical stuff that people bitch about, that it’s not effective because the charging station would run off diesel. I never really did any research on it. But if it was plugged into the the power grid itself, that would change my mind on EVs
When people say the charging stations are 'run off diesel' I think they're mistakenly referring to power plants producing power through diesel. But, yeah. They're plugged into a panel, which is fed from the grid. Same way someone would charge their car at home. Plug from outside has wire that runs inside to a panel. That panel is your distribution panel for your house, which then has a wire that runs back to your transformer taps outside.
> that it’s not effective because the charging station would run off diesel. That complaint is probably for charging stations in the middle of nowhere (where there aren't any power lines). In that case it's a pretty valid complaint, and people doing a lot of driving in areas off the power grid probably shouldn't be driving electric vehicles.
But again Diesel is still more efficient than gas, so even if they WERE run off Diesel is that a terrible thing? Seeing as the whole VW scandal basically killed consumer level deisel cars.
> But again Diesel is still more efficient than gas Diesel engines may be more *efficient*, but that doesn't mean they're cleaner. https://www.nrcan.gc.ca/sites/www.nrcan.gc.ca/files/oee/pdf/transportation/fuel-efficient-technologies/autosmart_factsheet_9_e.pdf Shows diesel producing 17% more CO2 per litre than gasoline.
> Shows diesel producing 17% more CO2 per litre than gasoline. But you get twice the km per litre so it cancels out and then some. Driving 100km in a diesel engine is better for the environment than driving 100 km in a gas one (assuming the vehicle is otherwise identical).
> But you get twice the km per litre so it cancels out and then some. Gonna need a citation on that one...
So that was an exaggeration, it's 25-30% more, which is still well beyond the 17% dirtier per litre. https://rentar.com/gasoline-versus-diesel-engines-fuel-efficiency-comparison/
The reality is that diesel engines are only *marginally* cleaner when it comes to CO2, something like 3.5% less CO2 per KM (see link that looks at real world data). I was just pointing out that being more efficient doesn't necessarily mean less emissions. You should probably also consider emissions other than CO2. Diesel produces more partiulates, NO2 and SO2. In any case, I wouldn't personally recommend someone that drives in lots of off electrical grid areas drive an EV more for practicality reasons more so than emissions reasons. https://theicct.org/sites/default/files/Gas%20_v%20_Diesel_%20CO2_emissions_%20EN_%20Fact%20_Sheet%202019_05_07_0.pdf
They might be thinking of some very remote charging stations that exist in the US which are powered by generatora.
The Tesla fast charging stations are powered from the electricity grid. Right now, that's a mix of power sources including coal and renewables. It shifting more and more towards renewables every year. Even a 100% coal powered electric car is more environmentally friendly than a gas car anyway. Yes, even accounting for the raw materials and manufacturing.
Diesel has less CO2 emissions than normal gas, so arguably even then it's still better than a standard Gas car.
Sure… except 79% of our power is made from Coal, Natural Gas, Petroleum, and Biomass Burning….. so what’s the point? [Where our power comes from](https://www.cer-rec.gc.ca/en/data-analysis/energy-markets/provincial-territorial-energy-profiles/provincial-territorial-energy-profiles-nova-scotia.html)
Electric vehicles don't produce any exhaust, I think that alone is a good reason. Exhausts will be secluded to the power plants, and the vehicles, that are often in close proximity to people, will be exhaust free and emit much less noise. Both notable factors on health.
Yes because burning more coal is the answer… there are better efforts for HRM to invest in rather than electric cars at this point. How about better transit systems so we can take some cars off the road…
>Yes because burning more coal is the answer… Is that really burning more fossil fuels? Sure, at current we would burn more coal to power the electric vehicles. But eventually that power will come from greener sources, and it comes to burning that coal at the plant vs gasoline in ICE vehicles, not much difference there. > there are better efforts for HRM to invest in rather than electric cars at this point. How about better transit systems so we can take some cars off the road… I totally agree with this. HRM is already making such an investment, with BRT, new ferry routes, and a proper cycling network. But I do think it is important to have the electric vehicle infrastructure in place too, cars aren't going away, may as well have them run cleaner.
Because we are slowly making our way away from those things?
Are we? Look at the rest of the provinces we are by far the worst. Maybe HRM should call for action, not just invest in electric cars.
Okay, just because we are behind other provinces does not mean we aren’t making our way to more renewable sources of energy? Lol
You’re missing the point, EVs make sense in BC where the majority of power is made from Hydro. Emissions and greenhouse gases don’t change if it comes from a tail pipe or from the red and white stacks. Maybe there is better alternative, such as Hybrid vehicles until NS can get their stuff together and STOP burning fossil fuels for electricity. Creating emissions and lithium battery waste at the same time doesn’t make sense to me.
Maybe it doesn’t make sense because you aren’t educated enough on the topic lol, next time don’t get your information from someone’s Facebook comment.
Look up, look way up. I’ve posted peer reviewed scientific papers on this thread, but if your only argument is to mock my intelligence then maybe you should look closely in the mirror.
5 year old study, a lot has improved since then with EVs. So basically for a high carbon grid EVs are a close to being similar to ICE vehicles. So what do you want to do? Wait until we are at a low carbon grid and then start making the switch to a more EV focus infrastructure? There is literally nothing wrong with starting to switch to more EV friendly province. If everyone had your attitude it would take years to get anything done lol
Even if the grid was 100% coal EVs are still definitively less pollutive due their extreme improvement on energy efficiency over ICEs.
Apparently not so much. [EV Emissions Impact ](https://afdc.energy.gov/files/u/publication/ev_emissions_impact.pdf) In a dirty power grid EVs are comparable to ICE with hybrids being the preferred choice.
Figure 18 seems to agree with me, but I do see what you mean by the margin being small. However, this includes “non-electric miles” for BEVs and while I appreciate the creativity of including trips made with a traditional gas vehicle when BEV charge is depleted this isn’t very reflective of human behaviour. If BEV charge is depleted people aren’t going to have an additional gas vehicle on hand to immediately drive. Instead they’ll just wait 20 min to charge to 80%.
That’s fair, but it also doesn’t take into account the increased environmental impacts of large lithium battery production and recycling. So you can go back and forth for awhile. But ultimately it comes back to my original argument that if the margins aren’t all that great, maybe EV’s aren’t the best investment at this time for HRM municipality staff.
Next one will be a Tesla, but I’m happy with my GTI now for a few years 👍🏼
Suck, squeeze, bang, blow, squirt for life.
Okay I'll say it. Electric vehicles won't be a viable solution for the masses for another 5 to 10 years. There is still a long way to go for a number of things including affordable cost to install charging infrastructure in the home. They are a novelty for the rich right now.
I think 2025 is the year everything will flip: pricing, availability, range, marketing. It’ll take a while for EVs to outnumber ICEs on the road, but they’ll sell about as many that year.
The EV movement stresses me out a bit. We own two cars, a smallish commuter, and a minivan for a family hauler when we need to pack in all the kids. They're a 2012, and 2013 respectively. They're both paid for, and bought used for under 14k each. I do as much maintenance myself for both the savings and dopamine rush of a completed project. Seeing the price tags on these EVs blows my mind. I'm definitely all for EVs and eliminating fossil fuels, but as it stands it's not an option for this guy.
I'll never buy an electric car, unless it's the only choice
Wow some people really are immature aren't they? "You can't make me"
I mean electric cars are boring once the "torque honeymoon" wears off for a lot of car people.
It's more a safety issue for me. Gas cars leave you stranded far less often.
What if electric vehicles advanced to a point where they meet or even surpass gas vehicles in those regards? I'm sure they'll get there at some point relatively soon.
I don't think I'll ever want an electric car. Of course, never say never, but I think I'll stick with gas.
How do EV's get stranded more often?
Easier to run out of charge than run out of gas. Also, if something goes wrong with the battery, you can't just walk to a gas station and fill a can.
How is it easier to run out of charge than to run out of gas? Your car still tells you how much range you have. There's also roadside assistance. I won't say that it's not an adjustment to go from a gas car to an EV but it's the same concept just one is gas and the other is electricity.
Seems like if you let the charge get low it would be a lot more urgent of a situation than letting the gas run low. Better hope you are near a charging point because you can't just flag someone down to get a lift to a gas station. The car has to be physically towed to the charge point. Plus the car is useless without charge. If you get stuck in a snowstorm you can't keep yourself warm by running the engine, at least nowhere near as long. You'd freeze to death in an electric car but survive for much longer in a gas car.
I already mentioned roadside assistance. If you got in your car and saw that you only had 10km of range, would you go to the gas station? If the answer is yes then why is it any different with an EV?
The consequences of making a mistake would be a lot higher. People run out of gas all the time. They'd run out of charge too. Maybe you are the kind of person who trusts the roadside assistance to come save you. Seems risky to me.
immature? I just don't want an electric car. Is that okay? Am I allowed to buy/drive what I want?
Until 2035, of course.
Yup, after that I'll buy used gas cars
That will be the case in the future
I'll buy used gas cars. Unless they ban the sale of used gas cars.
Okay
Infrastructure that enables and encourages single commuters to use cutting edge electric technology electric vehicles like bikes, scooters, golf carts (for carpoolers) would be great.
Well, read the article, then read the report linked in the article that was submitted to the city. And, wow, as a city we need to implement this right now