"Peak" will change when everyone and their brother starts charging their EV's at night.
Electric cars make utility bills cheaper for everyone, new research finds
- Thread starter Vercingetorix
- Start date
And there are MANY homes that fit into this category. And the bulk of them are older, inner city and urban homes that are the most suitable for EV use. These people had better get quotes from a licensed electrician before they do any shopping for EV's.
Most of this kind of electrical work doesn't come as cheap as many might think. I'm currently shopping to have power run to a new shed I had built on my property. There is a 30 Amp box 2 feet from the shed. The quotes I'm getting are much higher than I expected for it to meet code.
So people actually believe eliminating the competition and creating huge electrical monopolies will be good for the customers . Only thing worse is when the government uses the California and Texas grids to justify taking over and then maintaining it to the standards of our collapsing bridges and failing schools.
Judge for yourself. California has the greatest concentration of EV’s in the USA with Los Angeles included.
Today California is about the worst model there is out there to craft anything by.
Lets not forget NY.
Much like the word "theory", which has a very different meaning in science than as a lay term but still gets all bastardized to hell by lay people, ALL research has a series of assumptions that must be made. Now some of these assumptions are better or more appropriate than others, but the fact that researchers made assumptions at all is not grounds for dismissal. If that were the case, no research would ever be publishable.not very well written..
ASSuME
How about for owners that have solar panels with net billing and dont pay for electricity did that lower rates for everyone too?
Very shallow article that reads like a rah rah puff piece.
And MA, we took it right in the backside last month with rate increases, no buy back and no off peak hours. 3 power failures in the last 2 weeks. EV may be a solution for some but certainly not here and probably never will be.Lets not forget NY.
+1 not a solution here either. My brother recently retired from Con-Ed, the guys in the know there laugh when asked when the grid will be ready for all EV's. 25 years or more, maybe.
Absolutely. And in some ways they're even worse.Lets not forget NY.
Peaker plants run around the clock…
That may be but then the utilities will scream that they need a rate increase in order to pay for the extra fuel they have to purchase in order to generate the increased amount of electricity, more payroll, benefits, etc.
That was my point
That's a key reason I bought a solar project. Why be at the mercy of a terrible company, especially with a monopoly, like PG&E?
earlyre said:
in my neck of the woods there is no peak/off peak pricing... just the price...
I think what Earlyre is saying is he pays a flat rate electric cost which is very common. His electric charge per kWh is the same 24 hours a day.
Other common metering rates are also peak/off peak. In this case the electric utility charges a much higher rate during peak usage times and a much lower discounted rate during low usage times. If you have this type of metering it makes sense, if it's possible for you, to charge your EV during off peak metering, to do so at peak metering will be very much more costly.
Example, where we live our rate is roughly 5.5 cents a kWr off peak but they take the one 3 hours highest peak usage day of the month and charge $12 (12 dollars) a kWh and add that to the bill. All said our average cost per kWh was roughly 10 cents kWh.
Where we are moving to in NC, it's a fixed rate, 24 hours a day at 13 cents kWh.
in my neck of the woods there is no peak/off peak pricing... just the price...
I think what Earlyre is saying is he pays a flat rate electric cost which is very common. His electric charge per kWh is the same 24 hours a day.
Other common metering rates are also peak/off peak. In this case the electric utility charges a much higher rate during peak usage times and a much lower discounted rate during low usage times. If you have this type of metering it makes sense, if it's possible for you, to charge your EV during off peak metering, to do so at peak metering will be very much more costly.
Example, where we live our rate is roughly 5.5 cents a kWr off peak but they take the one 3 hours highest peak usage day of the month and charge $12 (12 dollars) a kWh and add that to the bill. All said our average cost per kWh was roughly 10 cents kWh.
Where we are moving to in NC, it's a fixed rate, 24 hours a day at 13 cents kWh.
Because solar is more expensive if you're not going to stay in the house for the payback? It maybe faster in CA with the outrageous energy costs there. But the median time an American stays in one residential home is 10 to 13 years. That means half the American population in those homes move in less than 10 to 13 years. When electricity only cost 10 to 14 cents kWh and gasoline currently 2.60 a gallon in a lot of the country its not worth it.
But agree, in CA most likely is, if they can afford it after buying the house.
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2022
- Messages
- 122
A few red flags for me that need cleared up.
Utilities have no incentive to improve efficiency beyond what helps them internally based on averages which is (partly) why so many grids are unable to pivot to increased demand or even weather changes in some cases. Demand is inelastic.
How can charging a car both utilize enough E to have a widespread impact yet not cost the utility company beyond other usage? Article claims this is due to charging off peak hours, yet California has blackouts and brownouts during peak hours. Charging EV's at night doesn't reduce peak hour demand; it just adds to the total demand.
Maybe I missed it in the brief blurb of an article, but how would this reduce everyone's cost for electricity?
The California Energy Commission has estimated they will have an 1800 Megawatt shortfall annually through 2025 (when their report ends) which, according to them, could leave 1.2 million without electricity. How would adding more burden to that grid help and when do we account into this 'savings' the cost of upgrading that grid?
The utility company can just spend those new profits elsewhere. Meaning any direct cost reduction to the consumer remains to be seen and is entirely unknown.
Given the large increase in EV's, it is entirely likely, if not inevitable, for the cap on profit to be raised for utility companies as the grids will need to be updated and grow. This would be done with profits or possibly government funds.
Basically, this straight up sounds like propaganda from Business Insider. You could apply this exact same logic to nearly any industry to include Coal/Gas or simply due to any competitive market (where one exists) or any highly regulated market like big pharma. Yet, price doesn't necessarily drop for high demand/inelastic items (like insulin) in highly regulated markets (like pharmaceutical).
I am skeptical to say the least.
And of course, at the bottom of that article is the following:
Utilities have no incentive to improve efficiency beyond what helps them internally based on averages which is (partly) why so many grids are unable to pivot to increased demand or even weather changes in some cases. Demand is inelastic.
How can charging a car both utilize enough E to have a widespread impact yet not cost the utility company beyond other usage? Article claims this is due to charging off peak hours, yet California has blackouts and brownouts during peak hours. Charging EV's at night doesn't reduce peak hour demand; it just adds to the total demand.
Maybe I missed it in the brief blurb of an article, but how would this reduce everyone's cost for electricity?
The California Energy Commission has estimated they will have an 1800 Megawatt shortfall annually through 2025 (when their report ends) which, according to them, could leave 1.2 million without electricity. How would adding more burden to that grid help and when do we account into this 'savings' the cost of upgrading that grid?
The utility company can just spend those new profits elsewhere. Meaning any direct cost reduction to the consumer remains to be seen and is entirely unknown.
Given the large increase in EV's, it is entirely likely, if not inevitable, for the cap on profit to be raised for utility companies as the grids will need to be updated and grow. This would be done with profits or possibly government funds.
Basically, this straight up sounds like propaganda from Business Insider. You could apply this exact same logic to nearly any industry to include Coal/Gas or simply due to any competitive market (where one exists) or any highly regulated market like big pharma. Yet, price doesn't necessarily drop for high demand/inelastic items (like insulin) in highly regulated markets (like pharmaceutical).
I am skeptical to say the least.
And of course, at the bottom of that article is the following:
Attachments
Last edited:
Solar also increases the value of your home; how much depends on numerous things. As you say, location matters most.
My solar was part of a larger, long term plan to minimize recurring costs. It took me 20 years, or more, to complete. Today my only recurring costs are property taxes, car insurance, small PG&E bill and cellular. If I drove the EV more, the solar investment would even be better with gasoline prices. I'm sure there are some other chump change costs in there, but I forget.
I am a fiscal conservative and I never think in short term goals. I have made some costly mistakes and learned from them. All good @alarmguy .
SammyChevelleTypeS3
$50 site donor 2023
To me it looks similar to a dog chasing his tail..... or the old robbing Peter to pay Paul.
Similar threads
- Locked
