Tuesday, September 28, 2010

Valuing Electric Vehicles...

Electric Vehicles have compelling value propositions in the US market. First, it can direct the dough away from OPEC to the pockets of US electric utilities. Second, it can create some cool jobs. Third, it will reduce demand for gasoline to further jack down oil price.

However, most people will not buy Electric Vehicle thinking – “Aha, let me bolster the US economy. Hey OPEC, you like the pinch, yeah?” Some of those saintly folks will buy EV because they are deafened by the carbon cry of our moribund planet, - and some of my miserly buddies will do it to save on fuel cost.

Well, emission continues: not through the tailpipes, but through the plant chimneys. Until renewables become a dominant mix in the generation portfolio, EV will only make just a little sense from the environmental standpoint.

But I think my cheap buds are wiser. EV, even in its diapers, can drive you up to 40 miles for less than 2 dollars. With dynamic pricing, this cost may go down to as low as 32 cents. If you are in Austin and you never have to drive more than 40 miles a day, your monthly fuel cost will be about $10. Pretty neat, indeed!

1 comment:

  1. A renewable future could be supported by vehicle identify metering and vehicle/homeowner purchase-based installations of 200A service with vehicle charging stations.

    Vehicle identify would pave the way for variable rates on mobility destined electricity and the taxation necessary to supplant the carbon trade.

    Still, as nuclear is considered a solution, perhaps it would be best to include the carbon trade in base generating and move the domestic industry into bricks and mortar bio-fuel. There is a certain appeal with cyanobacteria without derived feedstocks such as glucose, lisene or plain old sugar. Two birds with one stone using the existing industrial excellence... Desalination perhaps?

    What would that transition look like with industrial scale generation using ethanol/water and round-trip carbon capture, burning and reformulation?

    To me, the savings you mention should be the least attractive consideration, however attractive this reality may appear to everyone who relies on a motor vehicle. Perhaps it will be too difficult to sell the public on broad-based static per kWh pricing (whatever the inverval) and the savings realized on home ownership or the rewards present for living without a vehicle and having that money to spend on sustainable transportation options -- of course, with the exception that the vehicle, as mentioned, is priced according to conventional fuel standards.

    ReplyDelete