[Caevlist] The Economic and Societal Value of Going Electric

[WALTER J EAGER]

Alan Batie's comment is spot on. Quick charging offers a broader range of transportation options. For example I know a school teacher who drives from Corvallis to work in Salem at least 20 days each month in a Camry. She spends $200 per month on gasoline for this commute alone. Using a Leaf and the AeroVironment $20 per month option to restore its spent charge in Monnouth, she would power 50% of her commute. Using at-home charging on Pacific Power's Blue Sky Program for the other 50%, her monthly electric fuel cost would be about $50 per month. That is one-fourth of that for her Camry's gasoline. For comparable commuters, whose homes are on CPI power, it would be about $40 per month or one-fifth of what she is now paying for gasoline. Their savings would be from $1500-$1600 per school year. When combined with lower, drive system maintenance costs, their annual savings would go a long way toward compensating for the expected decrease in battery life, that results from quick charging. Were there to be a Level 2 charger at or within a convenient distance of her school then quick charging could be avoided and all of these savings would accrue to the net worth of her estate. That is just half of the economic benefit for commuters who use an all-electric vehicle, like the Leaf. There is an even more economical means for at-home charging. 


If this teacher's home has the necessary solar access, she can have a 3 kw solar electric system installed on its roof for an out-of-pocket cost of $1350 under the local Seeds for the Sol program. See https://sites.google.com/site/sftsv04/ for the details. In about three and one-half years the savings on her power bill would pay back that $1350. After that she would have the option of using cost-free electricity for charging her Leaf at home. This would reduce the fuel cost for her monthly commute. Assuming that AeroVironment does not raise the price of its monthly plan, the monthly fuel cost for this teacher's commute by Leaf would be only $20 per month, one-tenth that of her commute by Camry. As the price of gasoline continues its annual increase, the cost savings will continue to grow. 


There is also a priceless premium that would accrue to all of us, if this teacher decides to replace her Camry with a Leaf. The costly damage, that the gasoline now being burned in her Camry, is causing to everyone's health, would be eliminated. Although 50% of the electricity, used by her Leaf would come from commercial chargers that are powered by electricity from fossil fueled plants, the efficiency of those plants is twice that of automobiles. Their toxic exhaust gases are not as confined by mountains and a temperature inverted atmosphere in this populated valley, as is her Camry's exhaust. Now EPA is increasingly restricting the emissions from these plants. When the Citizens Climate Lobby proposal for carbon fee and dividend is enacted into law, these plants will be progressively replaced by solar, wind and geothermal-electric plants. 


Regardless of whether we are motivated by immediate personal economics or concern about human suffering and ultimate survival, coming and going with clean electric and food power is the only rational way to come and go. Or so it seems to me. 


Walt Eager
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20140519/ab51179a/attachment.html