How expensive is EV charging?
By Paul Homewood
https://twitter.com/ClimateThere/status/1739705299542446391
This is video has been posted on X by an EV driver, filming the public charger as she fills up. You can only watch it on Til Tok, but I have taken a screenshot of the interesting bit:
So she has spent £21.60, at 85p per KWh. But this has only added 81 miles worth, a cost of 26.6p per mile. As she says, this is blooming ridiculous, particularly she only has a small car. Even including fuel duty, this is probably twice the cost of a diesel. It has also taken 40 minutes to charge.
She also begins by noting that her computer said she had a range of 200 miles when she began her journey, but after driving 100 miles, the readout was down to just 63 miles. This proves that you will get much less mileage in real world driving than the theoretical range.
She also says her trip is 210 miles, so she may have to stop to charge up again rather risk pushing her battery to the limit.
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
40 minutes to add 80 miles? It normally took me 5 minutes to add 600 miles to my BMW diesel at around 4 times that cost. So she would stop at least 7 times to fill up 80 miles each time at 40 minutes a go to travel 600 miles. That’s well over 4 hours! And it would cost her around twice as much.
We must keep calling out EV madness, it’s a massive con, it’s designed to fail, make no mistake about that.
I put £20 of diesel in my car last night and added 180 miles in about 5 minutes.
Not sure if my maths is correct, my wife has a Fiat 500 (your contributor said she had a small car), 1L petrol mild hybrid, we get 52mpg normal, and 57mpg on a long run (180 miles was our last long run). Tesco petrol currently £1.38/L, by my reckoning, £0.12p/mile at 52mpg, and 11p on a long run. That’s correct maths, isn’t it? The E version of the Fiat is about £30,000. Bonkers.
Petrol is subject to 20% VAT on top of cost price plus 52.95p fuel duty.
At £1.38/L the tax free price is only 62p/L so at 57mpg (12.5miles/L) it is actually under 5p per mile. Adding the 5% VAT charged on electricity equates to just 5.2p per mile for a level playing field comparison.
It’s 5% VAT for home charging, but for private motorists…
‘Supplies of electric vehicle charging through charging points in public places are charged at the standard rate of VAT. There is no exemption or relief that reduces the rate of VAT charged.’
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/revenue-and-customs-brief-7-2021-vat-liability-of-charging-of-electric-vehicles/revenue-and-customs-brief-7-2021-vat-liability-of-charging-of-electric-vehicles
VAT is charged at 20% for non-domestic charging.
To oldbrew and Oliver King, I agree I could be wrong as I’m no expert on this but…as I understand it, the 20% VAT is raised on the “service charge” of offering the ability to charge at a Rapid Charger which is on top of the electricity cost. 5% still relates to the electricity cost with 20% raised on the charge to use the facility, this latter being the bulk of the cost. Someone as qualified as our host Paul would be able to interpret the subtleties of the difference.
This is a bit like the old variance between Turps Subs and White Spirit sold in decorators merchants. Turps was classed as a fuel so formerly zero rated thence 5% rated whilst White Spirit was classed as a cleaning product so attracted full rate VAT. Many trades outlets were done for falsely charging VAT on turps and pocketing the overcharge.
Tax Cloud says:
‘Where an EV charging point is in a public place to be used by the public, the standard VAT rate of 20% will apply (not the reduced 5% rate).
This only applies where the supply of electricity is ongoing to somebody’s house for example, or any other building that is less than 1,000 kilowatt-hours per month.’
https://www.accountingweb.co.uk/community/industry-insights/whats-the-tax-treatment-for-electric-vehicle-charging-points
Thanks for that oldbrew – happy to be corrected. I never realised there was a non domestic 1,000kWh per month cap either.
An interesting fact to tell to smug EV drivers: When you plug in your EV for recharging a fossil fuel power station increases its output to meet the extra demand.
A clearer argument avoids fake loopholes: Imagine all EVs in the country are no longer used, electricity demand goes down, renewable electricity output remains unchanged, so what is it that reduces its output?
Not if you live in the North of Scotland on a windy day. Then curtailment is reduced to increase local supply. Of course there is an increased risk that you won’t be able to recharge at all if the winds down your local powerlines.
What about the big charging banks that are powered by diesel generators pending connection to the grid? Or the councils that charge their EVs with generators. What on earth is the point of running a diesel generator to enable an EV to charge?
Subsidies and other EV concessions.
Meanwhile in other related news, just to prove we are being “lead” by idiots into EV Hell
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/dec/27/self-driving-cars-could-be-on-uk-roads-by-2026-says-transport-secretary
From the Daily Mail:
Driverless cars could be on roads in the UK ‘as early as 2026’, Transport Secretary reveals: Mark Harper says self-driving technology will be rolled out ‘gradually’ as he insists crashes are caused by ‘human error’
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12903103/Driverless-cars-roads-UK-early-2026-Transport-Secretary-Mark-Harper.html?offset=26&max=100&jumpTo=comment-1273364283#comment-1273364283
Work that one out!
It is simple – the human error is having a self-driving EV car.
A lot of people have worked this out which is why the politicians want to make it compulsory.
Whats your objection? Most crashes are caused by human error. And no human can simultaneously see 360 degrees around a car. And humans get drunk, distracted, emotional, tired. Self-driving cars don’t have to be 100% safe, just safer than humans.
‘safer than humans’ won’t be good enough for the public. They will demand perfection.
Having seen the work of my fellow computer professionals over the decades, they won’t come close to perfection.
See: Airbus.
My concern with self-driving cars is the issue of legal liability when one inevitably causes a crash. The manufacturer will be doing its best to pretend its vehicle was not at fault. The victims, whether the owner, operator or third party will have a job on their hands. Gravy for lawyers though.
Intelligence is not required to be this month’s Transport Minister it seems.
Anyone watching GB News this morning will have seen a video of a plane landing at Heathrow being thrown around by the wind as it touches down. Who was flying it? Yep, a human. Left in auto land they would be clearing up the wreckage.
Self driving cars are an invention of techies NOT the car manufacturers, which should tell you a lot. And they are a complete fantasy given that they can only function in a very controlled environment which ironically requires the removal of cyclists. Wait until the first one gets killed by a self driving car.
Assuming this is a European spec. EV (VW, Mini etc.) they are WLTP compliant. That is to say they conform to testing standards which attempt to replicate real world conditions. And much as with their petrol and diesel compatriots, no one ever achieves the mileage ‘as tested’.
Chinese manufacturers, however, don’t conform to WLTP so they do the old fashioned thing of testing their EV’s at their most efficient e.g. a constant 30mph/60mph under optimum conditions.
This has long been recognised as unrepresentative of real world conditions which is why Europe changed to WLTP.
If we imagine figures are unrealistic for European spec. EV’s now, just wait until the Chinese come along with fantastic claims of mileage from their EV’s.
The answer to this is simple – if Chinese manufactured cars are to be sold in Europe/UK, they must be compliant with European/UK specs – this just needs to contain the WLTP requrements for range declarations, otherwise they can’t be sold.
This raises the question, why aren’t they already ?
They are ‘compliant’ The Chinese just don’t use WLTP standards to test them.
Mmmm – maybe the use of WLTP should be made a part of the approvals and certification process …..
Its abundantly clear the UK standards don’t give anything like a realistic range.
But it’s a logical error. The figures are used as comparisons, not actual numbers. I buy the most efficient car, not a car that does X mpg. If two cars are otherwise equal, I buy the one with the best mpg. Thus all that matters is that the comparisons are right, not the actual figures.
If the figures are drawn up to different standards no comparison can be made.
Exactly. We all recall the shock horror stories coming out from probably anti-car ecofascists that in normal use, cars don’t replicate the test figures. Quelle surprise. Only an idiot would expect them to. It is a comparator not an absolute, but only if the test method is the same. Just as you can’t compare Rockwell hardness with Brinell hardness, or a VPN.
Gamecock suggests DUMPING THE TESTS.
They are semi-useless, and manufacturers will bring forth their own measurement standards, independent of stupid government. I.e., you will get BETTER data without the standards.
I think not, it has been shown so often in the past that manufacturers cannot be trusted in this regard. Just look at the various ‘Dieselgate’ scandals, and now Diahatsu, misleading the car buying public with their claims of tesing and compliance.
The only real way is to have a set of tests set by an independant body against which all can be measured and compared.
But hang on a min, don’t we have that already ?
We all know that the MPG figures are not real world, but it is a standard that individual models can be measured against and then compared with a reasonable degree of realism.
Leaving it in the hands of the manufacturers or motor industry trade bodies is more than just foolish, it’s almost verging on idiocy and irresponsibility !
When petrol duty revenue drops off the goverment will tax the EVs and the final blow will be recycling, when the car owner cannot economically repair they’ll get charged a few grand to tow it away and recycle/dispose.
Then, a lot of idiots will realise they are indeed idiots of a special kind.
We’ve been warned they want us to rent everything and own nothing.
There are folks out there who would accidentally on purpose give it enough of a dent to start it burning rather than pay to recycle it.
I believe Tesla have said their batteries can’t be repaired which has led to what you sayhappening !
‘But this has only added 81 miles worth’
That number is displayed on the charger. It is completely fake.
‘This proves that you will get much less mileage in real world driving than the theoretical range.’
Hasty generalization. Sample of one. It proves nothing.
Venturing beyond your local range in your EV is a crapshoot. I suspect owners do it only once. Don’t think she’ll do it again.
You could carry a spare battery in the boot like I have a gallon of diesel….oh, wait….
You COULD carry a little petrol generator back there. 😉
“She also begins by noting that her computer said she had a range of 200 miles when she began her journey, but after driving 100 miles, the readout was down to just 63 miles. ”
Probably because current temperatures in many parts of the UK are in single figures. EV batteries are not happy bunnies in cold weather. Of course, nobody tells you that.
NetZeroMania is a massive con. It’s inefficient, it’s foolish beyond words, and our political classes have been completely hoodwinked.
“and our political classes have been completely hoodwinked.” They have neither been tricked nor deceived. Our political classes know exactly what they are being paid to do.
Alex, politicians have not been hoodwinked. I’ll bet my house that most of them know the full story. Those that don’t know have failed in their duty to get the full story. Either they are deceitful or they are incompetent but definitely not hoodwinked.
Mr Homewood,
Do you have anything on this :-
âLocal governments and other agencies planning for SLR in the Tampa Bay region should incorporate the following key findings of this CSAP recommendation.
⢠Data measured at the St. Petersburg tide gauge shows that water levels in Tampa Bay have already increased approximately 7.8 inches since 1946.
⢠Based upon a thorough assessment of scientific data and literature, the Tampa Bay region can expect to see an additional 2 to 8.5 feet of SLR by 2100â
Tampa Bay Climate Science Advisory Panel Updated April 2019
[image: image.png]
“Based upon a thorough assessment of scientific data and literature, the Tampa Bay region can expect every adult reading this to be dead by 2100.”
YIFY
SLR along Fl’s coast is caused by “subsidence.”
There are a couple of reasons, but a big one is pumping of water
from underneath the growing population. From 2016 to 2021, Tampa Bay’s population surged from 3,048,963 to 3,219,514, an increase of 170,551, or 5.6%. The 2000 census showed 2,395,990 people in the local area. If you can find population for 1946, please post it.
Florida is a leader in desalination:
Click to access desal_faqs.pdf
Unfortunately not all of the Tampa Bay info I transferred to Mr Homewood has come out here. It stated that the subsidence factor was assessed and in the area of sea level measurements they chose the area had no subsidence. I suppose if there were subsidence there it would be readily noted by local knowledge which would scotch the finding.
If it is 8″ there it would be in many places also which is not mentioned. The technical info was pasted into a comment so not from the original. I had hoped Mr Homewood would have specific knowledge of that report.
Sorry, I’ve not seen the report.
Sea levels at St Petersburg have been increasing at about 3mm a year since 1947, which is similar to your figures for Tampa. There is no acceleration
https://www.tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.shtml?id=8726520
It is generally accepted that the US east coast is subsiding, probably by about 1mm a year around Florida.This is isostacy, as the land has been rebounding since the ice caps melted.
Local subsidence due to water extraction etc is of course extra.
Their projections of 8 feet are clearly absurd.
Very oddly worded as if deliberately(?) giving only part of the story. A quick search reveals:
“While Houston and New Orleans are notable subsiding locations, other places in the Gulf also experience high rates. In a large area north of Tampa Bay, subsidence rates have been clocked at up to 6 millimeters (0.24 inches) per year, about twice as much as global sea level rise, from 2015 to 2020 due to groundwater pumping. The Tampa Bay area is also relatively flat, meaning rising seas may overwhelm large swaths of the low-lying area.”
https://headtopics.com/us/land-around-the-u-s-is-sinking-here-are-some-of-the-fastest-areas-39631323
And again:
Get a Tesla!
Clearly, none of the commenters drives an EV. Shame on us, this is not a good Christmas subject.
I drive a model 3. Its the best car I have ever owned however while it is great for commuting it has limitations with off roads and remote rural driving.
Saw a post earlier elsewhere, American source I think, that Amazon, that virtue-signalled its adoption of Electric vans for its delivery fleet, is quietly reverting to a fleet of diesels, with the strangely worded excuse that, “Electric drive does not fit the service concept.” Could that be maximising a smaller fleet with vans in continuous use; no time to wait for a charge? It did not say whether this was a local area fleet or country-wide, or indeed which country, but the accompanying picture showed a compound with more than 100 vans parked up.
They found out what the property tax would be on a fleet of electric vehicles.
UPS and Fedex operate fleets of well maintained antiques. Pay virtually $0 in property tax.
Thank you.
NIO the chinese auto maker has come up with a replaceable battery. You take you car to their ‘station’ and automatically you old battery is removed and a new charged one replaced. Supposedly about 5 minutes.
The old battery is then recharged over time ready for the next customer.
Saves queuing time, saves problems with battery losses by rapid charging etc.
Seems a possible solution and might catch on – after about 5 years while remaining EV manufactures argue about battery construction etc as they want their customers to be locked into using their stations (at the car maker’s price etc.).
Could work if the mfg owns the batteries. Could cut the cost of the car, too, if you don’t own the battery. Used models might keep their value.
Seems possible.
Gamecock: I believe this is an option when buying as you can get an EV without battery and pay a monthly rental fee for a battery. However this (and the overall scheme) exposes you to price rises.
AS far as I know the (light weight) car has a range about 100 km. but with the current temperatures around China who would want to drive anywhere?
They need to get the range up to minimize swapping.
I wouldn’t be very happy swapping out my brand new vehicle battery for an old used one with unknown history.
Another (big?) problem: Gamecock has a couple dozen petrol stations to pick from in his general vicinity. Many brands. The requirement to go to a specific battery station can work if there are few users. With many, you can’t just pull in and get your battery swapped in “about 5 minutes.” You have to wait for your turn.
A good idea that will go horribly wrong with success.
It has been tried before – I recall seeing a TED talk by Shai Agassi years ago. Wikipedia has this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Better_Place_%28company%29
It didn’t fail because of the technology – but it seems to have been the Betamax compared to fast chargers.
Nio opened a battery swap out scheme in Norway at the beginning of 2023 whereby you lease the battery at a cost of c. £200 per month and use their swap out stations.
However later in the year they cancelled their free swap out scheme in China because they were having difficulties shifting their cars. Don’t know if their difficulties have affected the Norway operations
Maybe you could keep the battery and swap the car.
Milk & More made great play of changing to battery vehicles under its new owners Mueller – I still have a diesel Transit making my delivery.
Scotland, blizzards on A9, met office reports were inaccurate, warmest Xmas ever etc. Drivers stuck in drifts.
That’ll be ‘first adopter advantage’ then.
OT
It’ll be delivering parts for an unfinished Hinkley Point C ?
I’m surprised you can understand her.
Gamecock can write plans for containership powered by thorium-fuelled molten salt nuclear reactor. How soon you want them?
I understand that series production of floating MSR electric power (and thermal) units could upend the “artisanal bureaucratic PWR” business quite rapidly.
– imho quicker than fusion plasma containment and other engineering challenges for fusion will be solved.
Wooden windmills will be first to market though.
There is no need for EVs to have to buy expensive electricity. The woke government could simply order all energy for them to be free at point of use, and paid for out of general taxation….
The RAC have a cost tracker: https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/electric-cars/charging/electric-car-public-charging-costs-rac-charge-watch/
It is currently showing public charging of 21p or 23p per mile while petrol and diesel at 16p and 17p per mile. Home charging is 8p.
Dermot, I reckon that the RAC are somewhat “leant on” in their opinion.
From that report “As electric cars only allow rapid charging to 80% to protect the health of the battery, RAC Charge Watch calculates the cost of charging from 0% to 80%.”
Well, you know what, I seriously doubt that anyone will be rolling up to a fast charger with a 100% flat battery. If they are basing their calculations from la-la-land figures like that then I simply cannot trust any of their calculations. I notice a lot of their other assumptions are equally silly. Sadly I do not trust motoring organisations like them anymore.
A fill of the petrol tank on my Jag XE costs me about £52, takes less than 5 mins, and gives me a range of some 400 miles. EVs offer nothing like this convenience despite what some evangelistic EV owners claim. Still, from the new year our idiotic Govt will be fining car manufacturers thousands of pounds for every ICE car they sell above a Govt mandated limit – an idea clearly copied from the old USSR’s tractor quotas.