Electric cars make utility bills cheaper for everyone, new research finds

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 .
Value is in the eye of the beholder and the location of the home. In cheap energy areas people dont want a resale home with older solar panels on it, concerns many for various reasons, like roofing needing replacement or they dont know how long they will be in the home and then the panels will be even older, unsightly to many, in fact they weren't even allowed in our 16 year old community until two years ago and only can be installed now if on the rear of the home, unseen from the street.
Two people in our community (that I know of) out of 200 had them installed and one of the 2 actually sold the systems in an area where my cost averages 10 cents kWr. SO even someone more wasteful during the 3 hours a day peak time maybe cost them 13 cents.

Like I say, I do agree looking at costs in CA I suspect you are 100% on value but not here. Solar on homes can limit buyers here, people dont want them.
 
Last edited:
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:

View attachment 131717
You are right, PG&E has little incentive to improve efficiency and update their aging grid.
This article, if you choose to accept it, shows that charging an EV at night uses the grid during a low use time of the day. So companies are getting money at a time when their cost to produce is low. Charging off-peak does not stress capacity.
I take issue with the article's statement regarding lowering rates; that's not true around here. Rates continue to rise.

By the way, while brown outs will make those affected suffer, it is not as wide spread as many may think.
IMO, the only way to support our growing energy needs is to end the power company monopolies. Competition is good for the consumer.
 
You are right, PG&E has little incentive to improve efficiency and update their aging grid.
This article, if you choose to accept it, shows that charging an EV at night uses the grid during a low use time of the day. So companies are getting money at a time when their cost to produce is low. Charging off-peak does not stress capacity.
I take issue with the article's statement regarding lowering rates; that's not true around here. Rates continue to rise.

By the way, while brown outs will make those affected suffer, it is not as wide spread as many may think.
IMO, the only way to support our growing energy needs is to end the power company monopolies. Competition is good for the consumer.
I wholeheartedly agree that competition is good. It is just difficult to do with an E grid. Some states have tried but just don't have enough customers to make it profitable. Texas is one of those exceptions but competition is still low.

I understand what they are trying to say about peak/off peak charging. My hangup, to your point, is how does that save others money. My other hangup is the article seems to portray the E needs of consumers a fixed number and by charging off peak it shifts demand but in reality charging EV at night (or any other time) simply increases total demand.

That said, blackouts and brown outs are a real problem that must be addressed. They will only become worse in Ca until the grid is addressed.

"Power outages are on the rise in California. There were 25,281 blackout events in 2019, a 23% increase from 20,598 in 2018. The number of utility customers affected jumped to 28.4 million in 2019."

In 2022 as of October - "There were more than 50,000 significant blackout events in California...taken together the blackouts impacted the equivalent of 51 million customers."
 
I wholeheartedly agree that competition is good. It is just difficult to do with an E grid. Some states have tried but just don't have enough customers to make it profitable. Texas is one of those exceptions but competition is still low.

I understand what they are trying to say about peak/off peak charging. My hangup, to your point, is how does that save others money. My other hangup is the article seems to portray the E needs of consumers a fixed number and by charging off peak it shifts demand but in reality charging EV at night (or any other time) simply increases total demand.

That said, blackouts and brown outs are a real problem that must be addressed. They will only become worse in Ca until the grid is addressed.

"Power outages are on the rise in California. There were 25,281 blackout events in 2019, a 23% increase from 20,598 in 2018. The number of utility customers affected jumped to 28.4 million in 2019."

In 2022 as of October - "There were more than 50,000 significant blackout events in California...taken together the blackouts impacted the equivalent of 51 million customers."
Energy companies get additional revenue from EVs charging at night that they would otherwise not get. Since night demand is low, production costs are low. Off peak charging increases overall demand (and revenue) but does not stress the grid.
If energy companies have regulated profits (many do), overall margins are lowered due to more balanced use of the grid and resources.

There is no doubt brown outs and black outs are on the rise. My point is, while no one likes them, the overall affect is not as bad as some seem to think they are. Brown/black outs affect small areas and for a short time for the vast majority of occurrences. I cannot tell you when I last experienced one and I have been here for a long time and live in an older area. The only bad blackout was due to a storm, not over capacity use.
 
Lets not forget NY. ;)

THis is a legitimate statement. Jeff in CA is IMO an example of how an EV can work, and work well. And it helps he is honest about his experience for us to read. In my area of NY I've looked into solar 3x's. I have ideal exposure from sunrise until sunset with the strongest hours of sun still hitting a would be panel mount. First time was the Obama admin and the savings was 18-22 years including the tax incentives. And the contracts were wide open in the favor of Central Hudson Electric to change terms. No deal for me there. Gov't has never said no to them.

Second time was in 2020 with a roof replacement. I looked into Musk's solar shingles....ah, lots of ancillary costs and not worth it long term. After Biden pushed out his plan....I just won't name it as it has nothing to do with inflation. Salesman came and agreed, your site is better than most. Reading the contract and comparing to the tax break it was not anything reasonable to enter into.

One of my neighbors had panels installed about 6 years ago. He passed away and I finally was able to ask the new neighbors. They have been in the home for 3 years and their attitude is minimal savings and ultimately a liability as they will need a new roof within the next 5 years. They are holding off as current estimates are harsh and the cost of dealing with the panels and installing a new roof eradicated the benefit. I asked about % of savings and according to him; he puts it at 5% or so. The promise was 10-15%. It is not the solar it's the policy of a monopoly that is the electric co.

From my research, in my area of NY a geo heat pump seems to provide a more sustainable savings over time but would of course require supplemental heating for those too-cold days we experience.

EV's seem to follow the same pattern. At least for me. I'm open to being enlightened.
 
I had about half life left on my roof when I did the solar project. I rolled a full reroof into the project. Why anyone would not do so is beyond me.
Do the math. Heck, it's only arithmetic! If it works for you then consider it. Otherwise it is simply a non-issue.
My breakeven point is nearing or may even be here. All downhill from here on.
 
The article states utility rates are down for "everyone." Where in 2022 have electric rates gone down? Maybe they have in your community. I'm in NY and mine have gone up by more than 28%. Have your electric rates gone down? If so please give us the #'s. How many miles on your EV? When did you buy? WHat was the cost of home charge when you bought compared to now? Savings $$?
Rates in Ontario have gone down thanks to the cessation of funding new VRE projects (you can see the COVID fixed relief rates as well there):
Screen Shot 2022-12-21 at 10.19.11 AM.jpg


Of note: the Renewable Cost Shift moved a portion of the cost of VRE subsidies from the rate base to the tax base. This reduced supply cost if you look at Nov 1st, 2020 and Feb 23rd, 2021. However, the more recent reductions are due to efforts to reduce supply cost. This was something that could be pursued since no new subsidies were coming online, as that scheme stopped when the GEA was cancelled.
They can have their place and I see especially valuable for a work commute in urban area. But more and more they are not what was promised by many and that article is written with an agenda behind it. And if that article is correct, can you explain to me why CA is looking to ditch the mandated 30% IIRC grid payback? Related or no? I ask in sincerity as I am not up on CA electric issues. Maybe WI is a different animl and maybe you are legit with the lowered electric rates you've been provided. I'm interested to hear about it.
 
I had about half life left on my roof when I did the solar project. I rolled a full reroof into the project. Why anyone would not do so is beyond me.
Do the math. Heck, it's only arithmetic! If it works for you then consider it. Otherwise it is simply a non-issue.
My breakeven point is nearing or may even be here. All downhill from here on.

I put off installing solar because my roof will be due soon. I did get a signed contractor to add to the contract that they would remove and re-install the panels for a roof replacement at any time during the contract period. I was kind of blown away by that. I ended up choosing not to go with them because it was a lease plan. I forget what it’s called, but I’ll never own the panels and I don’t get any rebates. They would basically charge me a flat fee per kWh that was lower than my electric company. As it turns out electric rates are going up like crazy. I should have approved the install.
 
Yes, shuttering Indian Point had an obvious and predictable impact.

Rates in Ontario have gone down thanks to the cessation of funding new VRE projects (you can see the COVID fixed relief rates as well there):
View attachment 131796

Of note: the Renewable Cost Shift moved a portion of the cost of VRE subsidies from the rate base to the tax base. This reduced supply cost if you look at Nov 1st, 2020 and Feb 23rd, 2021. However, the more recent reductions are due to efforts to reduce supply cost. This was something that could be pursued since no new subsidies were coming online, as that scheme stopped when the GEA was cancelled.

What is the impact of nuclear-generated energy? What % of electric in Ontario is from nuclear power source? If anyone will know, it's you :D
 
One thing to keep in mind re: how dirty and socially ambiguous resource mining can be for EVs, is that all resources are rife with environmental impacts and human exploitation. While western production isn’t as socially deplorable, I’d hate to see the actual stats on countries in the Middle East.

I think EVs are an important part of the future. There will obviously be growing pains, but with anything else innovation sometimes relies on necessity. Irrespective of oil reserves, which are limited, but not a near-term concern, political impacts are unpredictable. Oil can shoot up and remain at an untenable level at any time in the near/mid future. It behooves us to further BEV tech so we’re already building infrastructure and improving tech instead of grinding economies to a halt due to unbearable energy costs.

Also, some of you are assuming that battery tech won’t change significantly in the future. Whether it’s ten years or 30, a step change is quite possible. Instead of improving efficiency and capacity of the same tech with incremental changes to geometry and manufacturing techniques and small comp improvements, it might be possible for someone to come along and change the game entirely.

a step change in battery capacity, durability and COST may also result in better grid stabilization. Solar, combined with home batteries, might become more common place. Maybe a pipe dream, but look at the litany of other improvements I history. Many major changes have occurred relatively recently. From communications to energy utilization, major changes in maybe my kid’s lifetime is not unreasonable.

Finally, now that the big boys are getting involved the chances of tech improvements are higher. If people continue to adopt a more EV-inclusive culture, more money may be pumped into R&D.
 
Yes, shuttering Indian Point had an obvious and predictable impact.

The full impact is being purposely, and wisely, spread out over more than a decade by CE. While the owner is currently Holtec, Entergy continues to subside the small town the plant is located in as part of the cessation of operation.
 
I put off installing solar because my roof will be due soon. I did get a signed contractor to add to the contract that they would remove and re-install the panels for a roof replacement at any time during the contract period. I was kind of blown away by that. I ended up choosing not to go with them because it was a lease plan. I forget what it’s called, but I’ll never own the panels and I don’t get any rebates. They would basically charge me a flat fee per kWh that was lower than my electric company. As it turns out electric rates are going up like crazy. I should have approved the install.
My "solar project" included the panels and reroof. I got a 30% tax credit for the project. All in, I basically got the new roof for pretty close to free.
I should have asked for the 240V recepticle for an EV, but I did not know I would be buying the Tesla later in the year.
 
What is the impact of nuclear-generated energy? What % of electric in Ontario is from nuclear power source? If anyone will know, it's you :D
~60% of our power comes from nuclear, and ~25% from Hydro-Electric. Average cost of nuclear at the moment is $0.09/kWh (Bruce is $0.077/kWh, OPG is a bit higher because they are doing "pay as you go" with their refurb). The cost will go back down one the refurbs are done.
 
~60% of our power comes from nuclear, and ~25% from Hydro-Electric. Average cost of nuclear at the moment is $0.09/kWh (Bruce is $0.077/kWh, OPG is a bit higher because they are doing "pay as you go" with their refurb). The cost will go back down one the refurbs are done.
Do you have any idea what distribution costs on average? For us its always the largest part of the hydro bill.
Assuming that there's no big increase in grid maintenance with more constant loading, having more people buy more electricity should reduce distribution costs, if distribution is charged per kwh? I just had a look at our latest hydro bill and distribution is not shown as cost per kwh and I believe it used to be.
 
Now they want to ban gas stoves.
That's not new. Many localities have already implemented restrictions for new construction.

I cook with propane. Having a powered vent is a nice thing for multiple reasons. I guess the idea of a vent is too much to ask...

A little nerdy math: 2ea 5000 BTU burners. 4ea 16,000 BTU burners. (3412 BTU/KWH) .
An elec equiv cooktop would require about 22,000 watts worth of electrical power. Discounting losses of course. Or,,, put another way, about 44HP worth of generator load at the power plant.

1DQqKJe.jpg
 
Back
Top