Which is cheapest - hybrid, plug-in hybrid or fully electric?

ComicGeek

JKenH said:

ComicGeek said:

JKenH said:

ComicGeek said:

JKenH said:

ComicGeek said:

No EV driver that I know pays 34p/kWh to charge at home, that's just lazy journalism (and even more lazy EV ownership if that's you!)

I haven't paid over 7.5p/kWh to charge our EVs (apart from one time I paid 28p/kWh at a public charger over a year ago, for a total of £13). 

It would seem that not everyone takes advantage of these tariffs. In fact from this research less than half of EV drivers have smart meters.

Only a quarter of EV drivers on time of use tariffs despite significant opportunity for savings

Research from Cornwall Insight has found only a quarter of private electric vehicle (EV) drivers have made the switch to lower priced time of use tariffs, despite many drivers seeing their household electricity demand double after making the switch to an EV.

Time of use tariffs – where p/kWh rates change through the day to reflect demand levels, grid constraints, and levels of renewable generation – have the potential to reduce the costs of transport decarbonisation across the industry. They provide consumers with the opportunity to shift charging to a lower priced, off-peak window, giving them the chance to make large savings compared to charging on a standard flat-rate tariff.  

On top of the quarter of EV drivers on time of use tariffs, a further 18% of EV drivers have smart meters installed (giving them access to time of use pricing) but are yet to take advantage of these tariffs. The remaining drivers are yet to have smart meters installed or have smart meters that are no longer operating in smart mode, so are currently locked out of time of use tariffs.

https://www.cornwall-insight.com/press/only-a-quarter-of-ev-drivers-on-time-of-use-tariffs-despite-significant-opportunity-for-savings/

Reading that article in more detail, it's only referring to circa 220,000 private EV drivers, so the assumption is that it doesn't include any of the company car EV drivers which would make up the vast majority of the over 750,000 EVs currently.

So that article only looks at less than 30% of EV usage, and probably only deals with the lower mileage vehicles then. At very low mileage then it probably doesn't make sense to use cheap off peak tariffs. So not anywhere near the 'less than half of EV drivers have smart meters' that you claim. 

 It isn’t actually stated in the article what constitutes a private electric vehicle. You have made an assumption that it excludes company cars. You may be right but we don’t know. It may simply mean a private vehicle which is electric. 

You have also compared the 220,000 with the current number of cars on the road - not the number at the time of the survey. 

Below is a link to the MSE advice regarding EV tariffs. In the comparisons made you will see that, allowing for the cost of charging your car for 160 miles a week or 8160 miles a year, your annual bill works out basically the same whether you are on a specialist EV tariff or a standard variable tariff. What you gain on charging your car you lose on the rest of your consumption. 

MSE also point out that there are a number of constraints regarding the availability of EV tariffs.

https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/utilities/ev-energy-tariffs/

The anti EV bashing is so tedious on here - fine, you don't personally like EVs, but trying to post every single one sided article is just wrong. And by the way, the Intelligent Octopus off peak elec rates have dropped by 25% since that out of date MSE page was posted. 

The idea that you would just change to an EV without also considering the rest of the home usage, and looking to move energy usage to different time periods, is crazy. That's the bit that people need additional support with. I currently manage to run 95% of our home electricity usage from off peak - that has been financed solely from savings from the EVs, no additional financing.

To be honest, I'm quite happy for no one else to realise the cost savings - the more that you discourage people to swap, the longer I keep my tax benefits as the government will have to keep providing incentives. All the while I save thousands each year.

And of course your submissions are more balanced. Who is bashing EVs? You obviously haven’t read many of my posts in the past. 

This was me 3 years ago. I love driving EVs; I just got fed up of the charging infrastructure - not EVs. If you last did public charging over a year ago when it was 28p/kWh it won’t be a problem you are familiar with. 

No, I'm all too aware of your many, many posts about EV second hand prices - fortunately completely irrelevant to me.

We manage to do 20,000 miles a year between our two EVs without using a single public charger! So not like we do only short trips or low mileage, just got EVs with sufficient range for our needs. I think what I've posted is a balanced submission - the whole cost savings are a lot more complicated than simply comparing peak electric rates to petrol prices, none of the articles I've seen have tackled it fully.

NlghtOwl

It’s hard to make assumptions which fit everyone and definitely not the main reason why some choose an EV. Irrespective of the exact running cost difference, there is an environmental benefit of being able to charge with renewable power than run on fossil fuels. It may come at a premium for a while though.

JKenH

ComicGeek said:

JKenH said:

ComicGeek said:

JKenH said:

ComicGeek said:

JKenH said:

ComicGeek said:

No EV driver that I know pays 34p/kWh to charge at home, that's just lazy journalism (and even more lazy EV ownership if that's you!)

I haven't paid over 7.5p/kWh to charge our EVs (apart from one time I paid 28p/kWh at a public charger over a year ago, for a total of £13). 

It would seem that not everyone takes advantage of these tariffs. In fact from this research less than half of EV drivers have smart meters.

Only a quarter of EV drivers on time of use tariffs despite significant opportunity for savings

Research from Cornwall Insight has found only a quarter of private electric vehicle (EV) drivers have made the switch to lower priced time of use tariffs, despite many drivers seeing their household electricity demand double after making the switch to an EV.

Time of use tariffs – where p/kWh rates change through the day to reflect demand levels, grid constraints, and levels of renewable generation – have the potential to reduce the costs of transport decarbonisation across the industry. They provide consumers with the opportunity to shift charging to a lower priced, off-peak window, giving them the chance to make large savings compared to charging on a standard flat-rate tariff.  

On top of the quarter of EV drivers on time of use tariffs, a further 18% of EV drivers have smart meters installed (giving them access to time of use pricing) but are yet to take advantage of these tariffs. The remaining drivers are yet to have smart meters installed or have smart meters that are no longer operating in smart mode, so are currently locked out of time of use tariffs.

https://www.cornwall-insight.com/press/only-a-quarter-of-ev-drivers-on-time-of-use-tariffs-despite-significant-opportunity-for-savings/

Reading that article in more detail, it's only referring to circa 220,000 private EV drivers, so the assumption is that it doesn't include any of the company car EV drivers which would make up the vast majority of the over 750,000 EVs currently.

So that article only looks at less than 30% of EV usage, and probably only deals with the lower mileage vehicles then. At very low mileage then it probably doesn't make sense to use cheap off peak tariffs. So not anywhere near the 'less than half of EV drivers have smart meters' that you claim. 

 It isn’t actually stated in the article what constitutes a private electric vehicle. You have made an assumption that it excludes company cars. You may be right but we don’t know. It may simply mean a private vehicle which is electric. 

You have also compared the 220,000 with the current number of cars on the road - not the number at the time of the survey. 

Below is a link to the MSE advice regarding EV tariffs. In the comparisons made you will see that, allowing for the cost of charging your car for 160 miles a week or 8160 miles a year, your annual bill works out basically the same whether you are on a specialist EV tariff or a standard variable tariff. What you gain on charging your car you lose on the rest of your consumption. 

MSE also point out that there are a number of constraints regarding the availability of EV tariffs.

https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/utilities/ev-energy-tariffs/

The anti EV bashing is so tedious on here - fine, you don't personally like EVs, but trying to post every single one sided article is just wrong. And by the way, the Intelligent Octopus off peak elec rates have dropped by 25% since that out of date MSE page was posted. 

The idea that you would just change to an EV without also considering the rest of the home usage, and looking to move energy usage to different time periods, is crazy. That's the bit that people need additional support with. I currently manage to run 95% of our home electricity usage from off peak - that has been financed solely from savings from the EVs, no additional financing.

To be honest, I'm quite happy for no one else to realise the cost savings - the more that you discourage people to swap, the longer I keep my tax benefits as the government will have to keep providing incentives. All the while I save thousands each year.

And of course your submissions are more balanced. Who is bashing EVs? You obviously haven’t read many of my posts in the past. 

This was me 3 years ago. I love driving EVs; I just got fed up of the charging infrastructure - not EVs. If you last did public charging over a year ago when it was 28p/kWh it won’t be a problem you are familiar with. 

No, I'm all too aware of your many, many posts about EV second hand prices - fortunately completely irrelevant to me.

We manage to do 20,000 miles a year between our two EVs without using a single public charger! So not like we do only short trips or low mileage, just got EVs with sufficient range for our needs. I think what I've posted is a balanced submission - the whole cost savings are a lot more complicated than simply comparing peak electric rates to petrol prices, none of the articles I've seen have tackled it fully.

EVs obviously work very well for you. You have the tariff in place and by the sound if it, other kit (batteries?) to make it work very well as it does for @Petriix. There will be many more people just like you but many in that situation will have already made the move to EVs. (I seem to recall that ZapMap once reported that something like 30% of EV owners also had solar panels). However, for anyone now considering moving to an EV the economics may be different. If MSE are correct, EV tariffs may not automatically be available to everyone so 34p/kWh is actually the reality for most new EV owners.

It is inevitable that as market penetration of EVs progresses, more and more people will be considering them in less than ideal practical/economic scenarios. It is that market for whom the observations in the WhatCar? Article are relevant - not existing owners of EVs. 

@Petriix and @Martyn1981 both are realistic/pragmatic that given the current, historically high, electric prices now is not the ideal time to be moving to an EV. Is it anti EV to say that? Things, hopefully, will change back in favour of EVs but the WhatCar? article tells the situation as it is today - no more, no less, 

Your usage pattern, managing 20k miles a year without ever needing public charging and having 2 large battery EVs is also perhaps outside the norm and perhaps there is a danger that because EVs work for you you believe they should for everyone. I am sure if I spent £40k or £50k on an EV I could make it work for me as well.  You are obviously very committed to EVs and passionate about them. Not everyone has those sort of resources and most of us need to think pragmatically about how we spend these sums of money. You say that you have been able to make investments to enable you to shift 95% of your electricity usage to fall in to the cheap rate periods out of savings from your EV usage but might there not be a little bit of man maths at work there? 

I wouldn’t spend over £40k on an EV - not because I don’t like EVs but because I have better uses for the money, and I am sure there are many more like me. (I had been looking for another EV around the £20k mark but recently when I moved to Octopus Flux the maths for running an EV (utilising spare solar) changed once again.)

As for the various posts about used EV values, there were a lot in the news and I posted them in the existing Used Car Values thread once I came on to the Motoring board. What is the problem with that? Should I not post these stories because they are perceived by you as anti EV? These are not made up stories nor are they from a sector of the press with any in built bias. Most are just monthly updates of the used car market from the trade. I take no pleasure in seeing used EV prices fall. My son paid me £17k for my 2020 Nissan Leaf in November and it is now worth about £10k. Do you think I enjoy seeing my son lose £7k. I am shocked as we all are by the fall in values of EVs - should we not mention it - pretend it isn’t happening? 

As you say it is irrelevant to you (great if you can drop those sort of sums without batting an eyelid) but for most people having bought EVs, perhaps even used EVs, at the height of the market it is relevant. 

Petriix

@JKenH you have a rather rose-tinted view of the press if you genuinely believe that the articles you post are somehow without "any in built bias". What people (quite reasonably) find difficult is that there is a strong leaning amongst these posts towards the unfavourable circumstances.

None of us are claiming that EVs work for everyone but there's a worrying trend towards only portraying the (potential) negatives. EVs were too expensive then, when they became a lot more affordable, they suddenly depreciate too heavily... Now they're too expensive to charge and EV tariffs cost people more, even though they don't.

What you should be saying is "lots of people can benefit but some people might not be able to save any money by getting an EV; make sure you do the sums" whereas you're making some pretty misleading statements that effectively read "EVs cost more than hybrids to run". While that could be true in certain circumstances, it's not a reasonable or valuable statement. 

JKenH

Petriix said:

@JKenH you have a rather rose-tinted view of the press if you genuinely believe that the articles you post are somehow without "any in built bias". What people (quite reasonably) find difficult is that there is a strong leaning amongst these posts towards the unfavourable circumstances.

None of us are claiming that EVs work for everyone but there's a worrying trend towards only portraying the (potential) negatives. EVs were too expensive then, when they became a lot more affordable, they suddenly depreciate too heavily... Now they're too expensive to charge and EV tariffs cost people more, even though they don't.

What you should be saying is "lots of people can benefit but some people might not be able to save any money by getting an EV; make sure you do the sums" whereas you're making some pretty misleading statements that effectively read "EVs cost more than hybrids to run". While that could be true in certain circumstances, it's not a reasonable or valuable statement. 

Most of the posts about EV values are factual from sources such as Autotrader, not opinions. 

If there is a worrying trend towards only portraying the (potential) negatives then perhaps it is because in the UK lately, there have been a lot more negative developments than positives. Used EV values have fallen, the cost of charging has risen, new EV sales are flat lining etc. 

I now quote an article from WhatCar? that suggests in the circumstances of their test an otherwise similar car in EV and a Hybrid firms cost a similar amount to fuel based on a standard variable tariff and you accuse me of “making some pretty misleading statements”. 

I think this has moved away from playing the ball to playing the man. 

Thanks, BTW for telling me what I should be saying. 

Grumpy_chap

NlghtOwl said:

It’s hard to make assumptions which fit everyone and definitely not the main reason why some choose an EV. Irrespective of the exact running cost difference, there is an environmental benefit of being able to charge with renewable power than run on fossil fuels. It may come at a premium for a while though.

I suspect that the number of EV buyers making that choice for environmental reasons is quite a small proportion.  Particularly in the case of company / SS cars.

ComicGeek

JKenH said:

ComicGeek said:

JKenH said:

ComicGeek said:

JKenH said:

ComicGeek said:

JKenH said:

ComicGeek said:

No EV driver that I know pays 34p/kWh to charge at home, that's just lazy journalism (and even more lazy EV ownership if that's you!)

I haven't paid over 7.5p/kWh to charge our EVs (apart from one time I paid 28p/kWh at a public charger over a year ago, for a total of £13). 

It would seem that not everyone takes advantage of these tariffs. In fact from this research less than half of EV drivers have smart meters.

Only a quarter of EV drivers on time of use tariffs despite significant opportunity for savings

Research from Cornwall Insight has found only a quarter of private electric vehicle (EV) drivers have made the switch to lower priced time of use tariffs, despite many drivers seeing their household electricity demand double after making the switch to an EV.

Time of use tariffs – where p/kWh rates change through the day to reflect demand levels, grid constraints, and levels of renewable generation – have the potential to reduce the costs of transport decarbonisation across the industry. They provide consumers with the opportunity to shift charging to a lower priced, off-peak window, giving them the chance to make large savings compared to charging on a standard flat-rate tariff.  

On top of the quarter of EV drivers on time of use tariffs, a further 18% of EV drivers have smart meters installed (giving them access to time of use pricing) but are yet to take advantage of these tariffs. The remaining drivers are yet to have smart meters installed or have smart meters that are no longer operating in smart mode, so are currently locked out of time of use tariffs.

https://www.cornwall-insight.com/press/only-a-quarter-of-ev-drivers-on-time-of-use-tariffs-despite-significant-opportunity-for-savings/

Reading that article in more detail, it's only referring to circa 220,000 private EV drivers, so the assumption is that it doesn't include any of the company car EV drivers which would make up the vast majority of the over 750,000 EVs currently.

So that article only looks at less than 30% of EV usage, and probably only deals with the lower mileage vehicles then. At very low mileage then it probably doesn't make sense to use cheap off peak tariffs. So not anywhere near the 'less than half of EV drivers have smart meters' that you claim. 

 It isn’t actually stated in the article what constitutes a private electric vehicle. You have made an assumption that it excludes company cars. You may be right but we don’t know. It may simply mean a private vehicle which is electric. 

You have also compared the 220,000 with the current number of cars on the road - not the number at the time of the survey. 

Below is a link to the MSE advice regarding EV tariffs. In the comparisons made you will see that, allowing for the cost of charging your car for 160 miles a week or 8160 miles a year, your annual bill works out basically the same whether you are on a specialist EV tariff or a standard variable tariff. What you gain on charging your car you lose on the rest of your consumption. 

MSE also point out that there are a number of constraints regarding the availability of EV tariffs.

https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/utilities/ev-energy-tariffs/

The anti EV bashing is so tedious on here - fine, you don't personally like EVs, but trying to post every single one sided article is just wrong. And by the way, the Intelligent Octopus off peak elec rates have dropped by 25% since that out of date MSE page was posted. 

The idea that you would just change to an EV without also considering the rest of the home usage, and looking to move energy usage to different time periods, is crazy. That's the bit that people need additional support with. I currently manage to run 95% of our home electricity usage from off peak - that has been financed solely from savings from the EVs, no additional financing.

To be honest, I'm quite happy for no one else to realise the cost savings - the more that you discourage people to swap, the longer I keep my tax benefits as the government will have to keep providing incentives. All the while I save thousands each year.

And of course your submissions are more balanced. Who is bashing EVs? You obviously haven’t read many of my posts in the past. 

This was me 3 years ago. I love driving EVs; I just got fed up of the charging infrastructure - not EVs. If you last did public charging over a year ago when it was 28p/kWh it won’t be a problem you are familiar with. 

No, I'm all too aware of your many, many posts about EV second hand prices - fortunately completely irrelevant to me.

We manage to do 20,000 miles a year between our two EVs without using a single public charger! So not like we do only short trips or low mileage, just got EVs with sufficient range for our needs. I think what I've posted is a balanced submission - the whole cost savings are a lot more complicated than simply comparing peak electric rates to petrol prices, none of the articles I've seen have tackled it fully.

EVs obviously work very well for you. You have the tariff in place and by the sound if it, other kit (batteries?) to make it work very well as it does for @Petriix. There will be many more people just like you but many in that situation will have already made the move to EVs. (I seem to recall that ZapMap once reported that something like 30% of EV owners also had solar panels). However, for anyone now considering moving to an EV the economics may be different. If MSE are correct, EV tariffs may not automatically be available to everyone so 34p/kWh is actually the reality for most new EV owners.

It is inevitable that as market penetration of EVs progresses, more and more people will be considering them in less than ideal practical/economic scenarios. It is that market for whom the observations in the WhatCar? Article are relevant - not existing owners of EVs. 

@Petriix and @Martyn1981 both are realistic/pragmatic that given the current, historically high, electric prices now is not the ideal time to be moving to an EV. Is it anti EV to say that? Things, hopefully, will change back in favour of EVs but the WhatCar? article tells the situation as it is today - no more, no less, 

Your usage pattern, managing 20k miles a year without ever needing public charging and having 2 large battery EVs is also perhaps outside the norm and perhaps there is a danger that because EVs work for you you believe they should for everyone. I am sure if I spent £40k or £50k on an EV I could make it work for me as well.  You are obviously very committed to EVs and passionate about them. Not everyone has those sort of resources and most of us need to think pragmatically about how we spend these sums of money. You say that you have been able to make investments to enable you to shift 95% of your electricity usage to fall in to the cheap rate periods out of savings from your EV usage but might there not be a little bit of man maths at work there? 

I wouldn’t spend over £40k on an EV - not because I don’t like EVs but because I have better uses for the money, and I am sure there are many more like me. (I had been looking for another EV around the £20k mark but recently when I moved to Octopus Flux the maths for running an EV (utilising spare solar) changed once again.)

As for the various posts about used EV values, there were a lot in the news and I posted them in the existing Used Car Values thread once I came on to the Motoring board. What is the problem with that? Should I not post these stories because they are perceived by you as anti EV? These are not made up stories nor are they from a sector of the press with any in built bias. Most are just monthly updates of the used car market from the trade. I take no pleasure in seeing used EV prices fall. My son paid me £17k for my 2020 Nissan Leaf in November and it is now worth about £10k. Do you think I enjoy seeing my son lose £7k. I am shocked as we all are by the fall in values of EVs - should we not mention it - pretend it isn’t happening? 

As you say it is irrelevant to you (great if you can drop those sort of sums without batting an eyelid) but for most people having bought EVs, perhaps even used EVs, at the height of the market it is relevant. 

Still inaccurate, unbalanced journalism in those articles, that fail to look at the whole financial picture.

I'm not suggesting that EVs are right for everyone - just that if an article focuses in on one part of the overall financial picture, then at least provide a balanced view with all the options presented, not just the ones cherry picked to agree with their conclusions.

I haven't spent a penny on our EVs, both are company cars. I wouldn't buy one privately yet, it doesn't work financially at the moment. But the opportunity with the company cars has saved me a lot of money, and that might also be the right answer for a lot of people.

JKenH

Let’s stop arguing about the press/media if we can. The Left think they are right wing and to varying degrees the mouthpiece of Nazis and big business while the Right think the press are left wing and  to varying degrees the mouthpiece of Marxists and the Woke. Most of us believe we are moderate centrists and anyone who disagrees with us must be extremist on the left or the right. If it is a story we don’t like then we assume it is written with an agenda. It is human nature to share stories/reports and opinions which support our view of the world and reject those that don’t. While we might not agree with much of what we see (on both sides) it is nevertheless beneficial for us to be exposed to alternative points of view as even if we reject them we see that other people see the world differently to us. It doesn’t mean they are mad or stupid, they may be in a different situation or just have a separate set of beliefs or priorities to us. I’m not stupid and I assume you aren’t either. It’s human nature to stand up for what we believe in and defend our choices. By exposure and listening to differing opinions we understand better why the world is like it is today and not how we would like it to be. 

Back to the subject in hand. Thanks for clarifying that both your EVs are company cars. That makes a lot of sense, even more so if you don’t have to travel long distances in them. I have said (I don’t recall if it was in this thread or not) that for some people EVs are a no brainer and for others a non starter. Your lifestyle and financial situation seems perfectly suited to running a EV in preference to an ICE. Mine unfortunately doesn’t. I tried and it didn’t work for me. 

Petriix

@JKenH surely you understand that, by only selecting the facts which support one side of a debate, you are being biased. In this case, you've used an article that looks at a very specific set of conditions to make a general statement about "which costs more". That is wildly misleading because it's only true for that particular combination of circumstances.

It would also be totally misleading if I published an article stating that EVs cost 1.25p per mile based on my partner's recent 400 mile trip which cost just £5; even though that is also factually accurate, it's not reasonable to infer that all other people will enjoy such savings.

So, yes, it's totally fair for me to tell you that you should include caveats and nuance rather then making generalisations if you want to avoid misleading people. It's possibly lazy journalism or possibly an agenda, but whatever the cause, these articles are painting an inaccurate picture and, by sharing them without qualification, you're doing the same. 

JKenH

Petriix said:

@JKenH surely you understand that, by only selecting the facts which support one side of a debate, you are being biased. In this case, you've used an article that looks at a very specific set of conditions to make a general statement about "which costs more". That is wildly misleading because it's only true for that particular combination of circumstances.

It would also be totally misleading if I published an article stating that EVs cost 1.25p per mile based on my partner's recent 400 mile trip which cost just £5; even though that is also factually accurate, it's not reasonable to infer that all other people will enjoy such savings.

So, yes, it's totally fair for me to tell you that you should include caveats and nuance rather than making generalisations if you want to avoid misleading people. It's possibly lazy journalism or possibly an agenda, but whatever the cause, these articles are painting an inaccurate picture and, by sharing them without qualification, you're doing the same. 

But it wasn’t one set of conditions - it was two contrasting sets, typical of the types of journeys people make. One was a motorway trip where we might expect an ICE  (but perhaps not a hybrid) car to do well and the other was city driving where we expect an EV to excel. So no it wasn’t deliberately biased journalism. Could it not perhaps be your perspective on the article which is biased? You didn’t like the result of the test, ergo the journalist/publication has an agenda.

Could I not say the same about all the posts we see on the G&E board from sources such as RENEWS, solar Portal, CleanTechnica, Transport and Environment who overtly promote all things renewable. Is their coverage balanced? Do they have an agenda? Do you point that out?


WhatCar? doesn’t have a pro ICE  or a pro EV agenda. It is a motoring publication for motorists - it’s target anudience isn’t environmentalists. Was there a shock headline with the report such as  Hybrids as good as EVs in town and on motorways? No. You are perceiving bias where there isn’t any. There were other comments and qualifications in the report (which I omitted purely to address the crux of the report) such as “ For context, if we’d managed the entire trip on home charging at 34p/kWh, the total would have been £29.23 – so the EV would have worked out cheapest overall. Of course, that’s hypothetical in this instance, but it’s worth knowing for slightly shorter motorway journeys.” And “ Finally, it’s worth noting that the Niro EV is the only one of the trio to be exempt from the £15-a-day London Congestion Charge. This is a hugely compelling point if you regularly drive into the capital, and other UK cities (such as Oxford) have either recently started or are planning similar schemes.”

I can only presume you didn’t open the article in the link I provided. 

See also my last post on this topic in reply to @ComicGeek which was written before I saw your post.