Oct price cap increase likely to push energy bill to over £10k... for a family of 4...

ispookie666

@MariaAH Likely the rig was still running when your son was away.  I suspect he has some sort of server running 24x7

pochase

MariaAH said:

Vincero said:

MariaAH said:

Vincero said:

MariaAH said:

Just pulled off some consumption stats from my Zoe; since 28 May 22, 1622.9 miles with average electric consumption of 3.9 miles/kWh which is much better than would be suggested from the Hypervolt app of how much energy has been used in the last 9/10 months vs the mileage done. 

Don't forget that the conversion of energy from the grid to the car is not 100% efficient - hell, even the charging units themselves will likely have ~90% efficiency. The act of charging the battery is not quite 100% efficient - some energy is lost in the process which is why they need cooling for fast charging as that inefficiency manifests as heat - that cooling is another thing that uses energy itself which if course the car will not be counting.

When all is said and done, that 3.9m/kWh is just the car energy usage from the battery. The hypervolt app may be showing the bigger picture.

Thank you for your very enlightening post! This does explain WHY there is a difference between the Hypervolt app data and the car consumption data...In which case, the amount of energy 'lost' is truly shocking...

What is the difference? On a pure charging scenario I'd be surprised if it was greater than say 30% difference between them (I.e. if car is charged up by 10kWh, its unlikely to have used more than 13kWh from the grid - ideally should be lower, but faster charging is more wasteful). Also other things like pre-heating/cooling the car (if the option's available) will use up power from the charger - much like having the son's room Aircon running.

(Edited to correct maths)

OK...if my maths is correct...
Hypervolt app says 3340 kWh used charging cars...
Car data says 3.9 mile/kWh for 8900 miles which suggests 2282 kWh
The 'loss' is 3340-2282 = 1058
1058/3340 = 30% loss?

Not 30%, but it seems 19% is the number, see below. Never was aware about it being this bad.

The electric cars’ on-board computers only show the consumption for the drive. At the charging station, the vehicles have to recharge significantly higher amounts of energy because the computers do not take into account the losses in the upstream electrical installation such as the charging station, plugs, cables and on-board chargers as well as batteries. The difference remains invisible to the driver – but he still has to pay for it.

The ADAC examined 15 electric cars for their real consumption at the charging station in comparison to the data in their on-board computer. Together with other inaccuracies of on-board computers, the charging losses add up, in some cases considerably: in the case of the Tesla Model 3 LR, for example, just under 25 % must be added to the on-board computer data, in the Seat Mii electric just under 21 % and in the Jaguar i-Pace a good 17 %. But also the middle class cars Renault ZOE (almost 19 %), Nissan Leaf (17.6 %) and VW e-up (15.6 %) showed significant deviations. Only the KIA e-Niro (9.9 %) remained below the 10 % mark.

In order to provide consumers with a complete overview of power consumption, the Motoring Club is now asking manufacturers to include not only the consumption values but also the charging losses in % in the technical data. In addition, they should pay attention during development not only to efficient drives, but also to charging systems with low losses.

MariaAH

Update:  Kids went off to London at 9am this morning and not back yet, so that has given me 12 hours to monitor electricity usage...
In the last 12 hours...
Me on iMac for approx 8 hours, mainly MS office applications
Husband a few hours on TV (he is off work today)
2 x loads in washing machine at 30 degree 'daily wash'
1 x dishwasher load using 'auto' setting to adjust temp for load
Kettle boiled 3/4 times
Obviously fridge/freezer on too
No lights, no gaming PC, no air con, no cooker, no car charging

So in 12 hours, from 9am to 9pm, does 8.4kWh seem 'average' for the indicated use?

Mstty

MariaAH said:

Update:  Kids went off to London at 9am this morning and not back yet, so that has given me 12 hours to monitor electricity usage...
In the last 12 hours...
Me on iMac for approx 8 hours, mainly MS office applications
Husband a few hours on TV (he is off work today)
2 x loads in washing machine at 30 degree 'daily wash'
1 x dishwasher load using 'auto' setting to adjust temp for load
Kettle boiled 3/4 times
Obviously fridge/freezer on too
No lights, no gaming PC, no air con, no cooker, no car charging

So in 12 hours, from 9am to 9pm, does 8.4kWh seem 'average' for the indicated use?

Yep given the American style fridge freezer and that use. Bang on I would say👍

Alnat1

Do your washer/dishwasher have Eco settings? Use them when you can. They take hours, sometimes it's a pain but does save a bit.

markin

How old is the meter and the current read? If you knock off the EV use what is the yearly average?

If 10 years old it would be 3363, 9 years 3736, 8 years 4204.

chris_n

Don't recall (may have missed it) any mention of an iMac for 8 hours a day, depending on model that could well be another kWh or more.

NeverendingDMP

MariaAH said:

Update:  Kids went off to London at 9am this morning and not back yet, so that has given me 12 hours to monitor electricity usage...
In the last 12 hours...
Me on iMac for approx 8 hours, mainly MS office applications
Husband a few hours on TV (he is off work today)
2 x loads in washing machine at 30 degree 'daily wash'
1 x dishwasher load using 'auto' setting to adjust temp for load
Kettle boiled 3/4 times
Obviously fridge/freezer on too
No lights, no gaming PC, no air con, no cooker, no car charging

So in 12 hours, from 9am to 9pm, does 8.4kWh seem 'average' for the indicated use?

Family of five here. Washer dishwasher TV Xbox type activities we use anything from 10 12 kWh in summer over a day depending on if I've thrown kids in the shower or bath. Sounds about right to me.

MattMattMattUK

MariaAH said:

Although I refer to it as a Gaming PC, and he does do some gaming, the top spec graphics cards etc are required for his business (software developer, Web3 etc) and it has a watercooling system (which he tells me is economical)...BUT my Tapo energy monitoring plugs have arrived today...so I will find out for sure.

He is talking excrement, you do not need top end graphics cards for software development or web design, you only need them for gaming and for video or CAD work (unless he is a scientist running complicated simulations). No work system will use full water-cooling, many will use AIO, for the CPU, but the top end CPUs only have a sustained draw of around 150 watts, in theory a 12900k can top out at 240 watts, but you would have to be hammering a multi-threaded render, nothing in software design would get close to drawing that level from the CPU.

Edit to add, if he is really using a "high end work PC", it will be Xeon or Threadripper not i7/i9 and it will have a workstation GPU, not a gaming GPU. 

MattMattMattUK

MariaAH said:

QrizB said:

MariaAH said:

... it has a watercooling system (which he tells me is economical)...BUT my Tapo energy monitoring plugs have arrived today...so I will find out for sure.

I'm almost certain that you will shortly discover there is no such thing as an economical water-cooled PC!

Yep...it all appears to be pointing in that direction...I have the Tapo energy monitoring plug and his PC will not be switched on until that is plugged in. I am still baffled by March though, as he and his sister were away for 3 week and that was our highest electricity usage month?!

He left it mining bitcoin whilst he went away?