Posted on 01/09/2015 10:03:38 AM PST by LogicDesigner
In Europe, at least, drivers of the 100%-electric Nissan LEAF actually drive about 50% more than average drivers of petrol- and diesel-powered cars. This helps to bust the myth that electric cars are inadequate for the average driver, and that electric car drivers dont drive very much.
It also indicates that Nissan LEAF owners must be saving a lot more money than generally assumed. Electricity for powering a car is much cheaper than petrol or diesel. The average driver will save several thousand dollars (or euros, british pounds, etc.), but someone who actually drives much more than average is going to save a great deal more money.
Nissan reveals that European owners of its 100 percent electric car, the Nissan LEAF, travel more than 50 percent further per year (10,307 miles) than the European average for a traditional internal combustion-powered vehicle (6,721 miles), Nissan wrote yesterday.
...
One of the key advantages of the LEAF is that drivers can charge at home. Nissans data show that about 89% of LEAF drivers charge overnight, while enjoying the comfort of their beds and pillows. (Okay, Nissan didnt provide data on the beds and pillows, just the overnight charging.)
(Excerpt) Read more at cleantechnica.com ...
That’s true low cost driving.
I live in broke Illinois. They are giving big tax breaks for alternative fuel vehicle owners as well. Even at 57,500 I can buy gasoline cars with similar performance for around 30K..
“All these electric cars are costing us taxpayers way too much. I bet if you added up all the government spending an electric car has at least $1 million per vehicle in prior year government (read:taxpayer) spending behind them.”
Since many others did as well, I won't fault you for falling for the “$250,000 in subsidies per Volt” baloney that was published by an EV hater a few years ago. He took all the government grant money and divided it by the first 6,000 Volts that had been sold up until that point. The simple explanation is that since ten times as many have been sold since then, to calculate that number today you would have to divide that number in ten... and that is assuming no more Volts get sold. A more thorough explanation is here.
“Electric cars also result in massive Super Fund environmental cleanup projects.”
100% baloney. Please provide a link supporting this claim or admit that it is just a fact-free assertion. In the meantime, I can find some links to a few oil spills if you like.
“They also run primarily on coal produces electricity; coal, a substance Zero and his ecoterrorists have been putting out of business.”
Coal is not the primary source of electricity. In the United States, it represents less than 40% of generation on average. The other 60% is much, much cleaner: natural gas, nuclear, and hydro. Furthermore, electric cars are sold in greatest numbers in states that tend to use much less coal than the 40% average, like California.
It is. I intend to run it until it starts to become a maintenance hog.
If the range of the Leaf makes you feel anxious, then I would recommend the Chevy Volt. As an “extended range electric vehicle,” it has a 40 mile electric range followed by a 340 mile gasoline range. If you plug it in every night, most days you won't use any gasoline at all.
I currently rent and don't have a convenient place to plug either of them in..
In 2013, energy sources and percent share of total electricity generation were
Coal 39%
Natural Gas 27%
Nuclear 19%
Hydropower 7%
Other Renewable 6% Biomass 1.48%
Geothermal 0.41%
Solar 0.23%
Wind 4.13%
Petroleum 1%
Other Gases < 1%
Yes but France is 73% nukes.
That was what the thread started with, no?
You haven’t counted in that taxpayer funding all the grants towards. You only include direct subsidies to the Volt.
I guess you missed the stories on Nickel mining and cleanup.
Nuclear energy still produces massive amounts of nuclear waste materials that we still don’t know how to dispose of it. To claim there is no waste involved is just a bold faced lie.
If electric cars were such a great deal then you wouldn’t need taxpayer funding of any sort. Obviously, electric cars are not worth the money since it takes taxpayers to fund them.
When you add up the Tesla taxpayer funded subsidies did you bother to include the $250 million Kali state environmental credits? Did you include that 15% of automakers must have certain vehicles so Tesla sells their credits to other automakers? No? Didn’t think so.
Electric requires taxpayer and other car purchasers to subsidize it because it isn’t commercially viable.
Socialism sucks. It never pays off.
Thank you for providing the data that supports my statement.
“You havent counted in that taxpayer funding all the grants towards.”
Actually that was exactly what I was addressing. Please read the link in case it is not clear (here it is again).
“I guess you missed the stories on Nickel mining and cleanup.”
I guess you missed the fact that electric cars today use lithium ion, not nickelmetal hydride. You are thinking of the Prius.
“Nuclear energy still produces massive amounts of nuclear waste materials that we still dont know how to dispose of it. To claim there is no waste involved is just a bold faced lie.”
No one claimed that nuclear produces no waste. What we are talking about here is pollution, and so far the U.S. has done an exemplary job preventing nuclear waste from contaminating the environment.
“If electric cars were such a great deal then you wouldnt need taxpayer funding of any sort. Obviously, electric cars are not worth the money since it takes taxpayers to fund them.”
The same could have been said for the Internet before private enterprise took over. Then there is the space industry, which is now transitioning to the private sector.
If the United States and Europe transition to electric vehicles and it prevents the next oil war in the middle east while at the same time bankrupting Russia, Iran, and Venezuela, then I think there is a definite public interest in encouraging the technology.
I’m not a nuclear engineer, or chemist, but my assessment is that this stuff can be buried deep in the earth in Godforsaken places with very little risk. Only political wrangling from people like Harry Reid prevents this from happening.
Having said that, I’m good with carbon spewing fossil fuels too.
You’re wasting your time arguing common sense with the liberal noobs, they believe everything Owl Gore tells them.
Eco-twits are just like feminazis, nothing matters by their agenda.
Lol, I’ve voted republican all my life. I even supported the Iraq War, at first. However, it is clear now that we would never have gone there if they didn’t have oil.
I guess that after I debunked all your low information fact-free assertions, and you had nothing to come back with, that you have turned to ad hominem attacks.
Thank you for supporting my point.
Definitely, and that’s a good reason to have one, and why I am seeking whatever EV/hybrid looks in my price range in the coming years when my current car meets it’s later days.
Can’t you just get a heater for the car, to warm up the battery?
The same is true for many other gas powered cars as well, actually even gasoline is subsidized by the government. We are pretty far from living in a world that is perfectly marketable. Now that actually leads to a bigger question as to why the government would subsidize gasoline to make it cheaper than it would be on its own, when plenty of politicians call it evil.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.