How the price of crude oil affects local operators in America
How long and how much to charge an electric car – Search
Plus: These charts show how much it costs to charge an EV vs. refueling a gas vehicle.
By John Rosevear
While gas prices have soared in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, so have electricity prices – particularly in some parts of the U.S. that have been big markets
for Tesla’s EVs.
So, is it still true that it’s much cheaper to “refuel” an EV? CNBC crunched the numbers.
It has been true for years: Mile for mile, it’s cheaper — generally much cheaper — to recharge an electric vehicle than it is to refuel one with an internal-combustion engine.
That has been a key selling point for Tesla and other EV makers, particularly in times when gas prices have soared, such as now.
But this time there’s a wrinkle: While gas prices have indeed soared in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, so have electricity prices — particularly in some parts of the U.S. that have been big markets for Tesla’s EVs. That raises a question:
Is it still true that it’s much cheaper to “refuel” an EV?
The charts below help us find the answer.
These charts, using nationwide figures, provides a baseline.
Cost of charging EV vs. gas prices (cnbc.com)
The others use data specific to Boston and San Francisco, two markets where EVs are popular — and where electricity tends to be more expensive than the national average.
The answer in all three cases is that — even with regional surges in the price of electricity — it’s still quite a bit more expensive to fill your gas tank than it is to charge your EV’s battery.
Related video: How to get better mileage in your car amid high gas prices (TODAY).
Electricity rates have roughly kept pace with gas price increases in Boston and
San Francisco. Yet, on average across the U.S., adding 100 miles of range in your internal-combustion vehicle has become more expensive, relative to charging an EV an equivalent amount, over the last couple of months.
Is that likely to change?
While oil prices are nearly certain to fall in coming months as producers increase output, it’s unlikely that the price of electricity will rise enough to make EVs less affordable over their life cycles than internal-combustion alternatives.
Using February data, Jeffries analyst David Kelley recently calculated that the total lifetime cost of ownership of an EV is about $4,700 less than that of an internal-combustion vehicle.
He said that cost difference is likely to increase as more EVs come to market —
and as battery prices continue to fall — over the next couple of years.
How we crunched the numbers.
We had three questions in mind when we put together these charts:
How much does it cost to add 100 miles of range to the average ICE vehicle
and the average EV?
How have those costs changed over the last three years?
(Going back three years to February of 2019 gives us a pre-pandemic baseline.)
How have those costs varied between different parts of the U.S.?
For gasoline, the Environmental Protection Agency reported that the average new vehicle sold in the U.S. in 2020 had a combined fuel-economy rating of 25.7 miles per gallon. Driving 100 miles in that average vehicle would use 3.9 gallons of gas.
(Figures for 2021 haven’t been released yet.)
On the electric-vehicle side, the EPA’s efficiency rating for EVs — called “MPGe”,
for miles per gallon equivalent — gives consumers an idea of how far an EV can travel
on 33.7 kilowatt-hours (kWh) of charge. Why 33.7 kWh? That’s the amount of electricity that is chemically equivalent to the energy in a gallon of regular gasoline.
The average MPGe rating for 2022-model-year EVs sold in the U.S. is about 97,
so driving 100 miles in that hypothetical average vehicle would use 34.7 kWh of electricity.
The charts above compare how the price of 3.9 gallons of gas has changed relative to the price of 34.7 kWh over time, using monthly data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (for gas prices) and the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (for electricity rates) from February 2019 through February 2022.
Are Hydrogen Vehicles Better Than Electric Vehicles?
BY DAISY EMAH-EMAH
Which do you prefer – Hydrogen vehicles or Electric vehicles?
There is always this silent competition between Hydrogen and Electric vehicles.
Some parties think that Hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles have no future while others think hydrogen vehicles are going to replace electric vehicles. Whatever the case may be –
let us delve deeper into these vehicles and you can determine the answer for yourselves.
An electric vehicle uses a lithium-ion battery to supply power to a motor that powers the different components of the car.
They are either partially or fully powered by an electric motor. Electric cars are reliable, can run silently, and produce no emissions. Their batteries are recharged at a charging station. Hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles send power to an electric motor by hydrogen reacting with oxygen to produce electricity and water. The electricity powers the vehicle while the water is released as a by-product. They are refueled with hydrogen at refueling stations like gas or diesel and at a short period of time – less than 10 minutes.
Electric vs Hydrogen Vehicles – Similarities and Differences.
The greatest similarity between both vehicles is that they produce little to no emissions when compared to gas or diesel-powered vehicles. This makes both electric and hydrogen vehicles better for the environment as they produce greener energy and restore balance to the environment.
An electric motor is found in both electric and hydrogen-powered vehicles. They both require electricity to power the electric motor and other components on the vehicle –
the mode of producing electricity differs…
Both electric vehicles and hydrogen fuel-cell are relatively safe for use.
There have been concerns about the dangers of hydrogen in case of a fire and overheating of lithium-ion batteries. As with any fuel source, hydrogen and electric vehicles have their own safety challenges and automakers keep working at improving vehicle safety for their users. Electric vs Hydrogen Vehicles – Differences – Bing video
Although both vehicles are good for the environment, there is still a lot of difference between the two.
1. Price/No of Refueling Stations
Electric vehicles are cheaper than Hydrogen-powered cars. It is expensive to build hydrogen plants in many locations and this makes the production of hydrogen fuel-
cell more expensive.
There is also a limited amount of hydrogen refueling infrastructure and building
more will take time and a lot of money. Compared to an electric vehicle which has
a good amount of recharging points across the US and other countries.
2. Production Process
Hydrogen is not so green – they are clean when used to power your vehicle but
produces a lot of pollution in the manufacturing stage. You need a lot of energy and fossil fuels to produce hydrogen to power vehicles, and the process is a great contributor to global warming. An electric car battery can be charged using wind or solar making it cleaner and greener for the environment.
3. Refueling Time
It takes less than 10 minutes to refuel hydrogen-powered vehicles compared to electric vehicles 2 to 17 hours depending upon the charger) that take a longer time to recharge. This is because hydrogen cars are much lighter than power-packed batteries.
Electric vehicles are better suited for small-sized vehicles while hydrogen fuel-cell
can be used to produce vehicles of different sizes.
4. Range
Hydrogen-powered vehicles offer greater ranges than electric vehicles.
Hydrogen-powered vehicles have a longer range with less refueling frequency,
unlike electric vehicles. According to Automotive Technologies, most fully electric vehicles travel between 100-200 miles on a single charge. While hydrogen-powered vehicles can travel 300 miles before a refuel is needed.
Electric vs Hydrogen Vehicles – Which is Better?
There are key differences between both vehicle types, each having its own pros and cons. These challenges can be overcome as technology advances and improvements are made to existing vehicles.
Both are good options for an environmentally friendly vehicle, but your financial ability would come into play when choosing the vehicle that suits you.
Electric vehicles are more popular and easier to have readily available with charging stations for users. Hydrogen is not as popular which makes it more expensive and the limited availability of refueling stations should be considered when making your choice.
Technology is evolving and the world is moving towards emission-less driving – the future is bright for electric and hydrogen vehicles. More automakers are investing in making this future possible – where gas and diesel engines are replaced with environmentally-friendly vehicles.
The question should not be which vehicle is better but how can both coexist to create an emission-free environment. Hydrogen fuel-cell should not be an alternative to electric vehicles but should complement each other. Electric cars work better as smaller-sized vehicles because of battery weight – hydrogen fuel-cell are better-suited SUVs and trucks due to the lightness of hydrogen.
Hydrogen vehicles versus Electric vehicles – Bing video
Why didn’t hydrogen fuel cars take off?
First off, I don’t think it would be accurate to say that *any* alternatively fueled vehicles (electric, hybrid electric, fuel cell, natural gas) have “taken off”, even though for almost all drivers, hybrids and electrics make more sense than gasoline powered vehicles.
Electrics had their best year in 2017 and comprised approx. 1.2% of new car sales.
Hybrid Electrics are on the decline but even in 2013, their best year, they were only
3.19% of new car sales. Neither/none of these technologies could be considered as “taking off” at this time.
“Hydrogen powered vehicles” are Fuel Cell ELECTRIC Vehicles (FCEVs). Note we are not talking about using hydrogen in an internal combustion engine like BMW did a few years back. That’s wasteful from an efficiency standpoint. FCEVs have multiple issues, but one of the BIGGEST issues is *NOT* efficiency!
Fuel cells already achieve 55% and are predicted to get to 60–70% efficiency. We must remember that hydrogen is NOT an energy source, rather, it is an energy storage system, or medium (some have argued that by this definition, gasoline is also NOT an energy source as it takes a significant amount of energy to turn mined oil into gasoline).
Another answer suggested that lithium-ion batteries had an efficiency of well over 90% and then went on to describe hydrogen as significantly less efficient due to the “electrolysis of water” as being “a rather inefficient process”. That’s NOT how you make hydrogen and if you are going to include the making of the hydrogen then you also must include the efficiency of “making” the electricity for a fair comparison with battery powered electrics!! Yes, when hydrogen is generated from fossil fuels there are losses involved but it is LESS energy intensive than making gasoline from that same barrel of oil. The ADVANTAGE of hydrogen is that it can be made from every energy source!
So, you have a barrel of oil?
Better to turn it into hydrogen than gasoline. Natural gas? Although it would be best to use it in a modern gas turbine power plant to generate electricity (perhaps for an Electric Vehicle) it is still more efficient to use natural gas to make hydrogen for a FCEV rather than to combust said natural gas in a natural gas vehicle running at 30% efficiency. Solar, wind, coal? First choice is still to make electricity but all these sources can be used to make hydrogen. Try making gasoline using coal.
On vehicle hydrogen storage is a real issue as is the non-existent infrastructure of filling stations, pipelines and manufacturing facilities but it’s not as dire as others have claimed. The biggest misconception is hydrogen volatility/inflammability. Yes, extremely explosive, but nowhere near as dangerous as gasoline which is heavier than air and has a high vapor pressure. If there’s an ignition source, gasoline will find it. If there are passengers, gasoline will find them. Hydrogen is much lighter than air and rapidly dissipates.
Not certain but I think the current price at the pump for hydrogen is between $13-$16/kilogram and 1 kg contains roughly the same energy as a gallon of gasoline but because a fuel cell is 2.5 x as efficient as an IC engine, 1 kg hydrogen will take you more than twice as far. High pressure on-vehicle storage is expensive but state of the art is 10,000 psi typically holding 5 kg of compressed hydrogen good for a driving range of more than 300 miles on one tank. It takes roughly five minutes to refuel a tank of hydrogen, – approx. the same as a gasoline tank.
Ultimately, the main workings of a fuel cell are too complex/expensive at present. The proton exchange membrane requires rare earth elements and the system is dependent on multiple air compressors and electric motors. Also, to operate at maximum efficiency and provide the same kind of instant acceleration we have become accustomed to, a small battery pack and associated power conversion electronics are required. I wouldn’t count them out just yet but FCEVs have a long way to go for popular acceptance.
edit: some people want me to address RNG (not RingCentral Inc. or “random number generator”), -Renewable Natural Gas. Usage of renewable natural gas is growing and that’s great but like all lighter than air hydrocarbons, if the goal is to propel a vehicle, the most efficient usage is to use RNG to produce electricity in a modern gas turbine for an EV, the second choice would be to further refine the methane (basic component of RNG) into Hydrogen for use in a fuel cell and the third choice is to explode it in a conventional natural gas vehicle. Because of system simplicity, this is often done as it’s very easy to gather RNG at a waste disposal center, compress it, and fill your Nat gas compatible vehicles on site. Although this provides a great solution for a localized excess of natural gas, it’s not a technology that will “take off”.
Why is blue hydrogen cheaper than green hydrogen?
What is blue hydrogen?
Blue hydrogen is when natural gas is split into hydrogen and CO2 either by Steam Methane Reforming (SMR) or AutoThermal Reforming (ATR), but the CO2 is captured and then stored. As the greenhouse gases are captured, this mitigates the environmental impacts on the planet.
What is green hydrogen, and why are we hearing that green hydrogen’s time has come?
Thanks for the question. It is always rewarding when you find someone truly ignorant. Green in the parlance of energy politics means fueling industry and transportation from sources other than oil. It also means burning something other than hydrocarbons (oil and gasoline) in the mistaken belief that the resulting carbon dioxide is a pollutant.
The only sufficient source of energy available today is nuclear power plants.
However, these are abhorred by the green advocates. Enter green hydrogen, a pollutant free source. It burns hot and efficiently, and the product is water. Not so fast. Where do we get the hydrogen gas? It is a byproduct in the refinery of oil or from expensive electrolysis of seawater. So, green hydrogen is a non-solution to the progressive utopia.
Today, green hydrogen is 2-3 times more expensive than blue hydrogen, produced from fossil fuels in combination with carbon capture and storage (CCS). The production cost for green hydrogen is determined by the renewable electricity price, the investment cost of the electrolyzer and its operating hours.
On the other hand, green hydrogen is produced through electrolysis which is a process of separating water into hydrogen and oxygen. As per a December 2020 report by the International Renewable Energy Agency, today, green hydrogen is 2 to 3 times more expensive than blue hydrogen. … This produces only hydrogen and oxygen.
More than 90% of hydrogen produced in the world today is by using fossil fuels – coal, oil or natural gas – in a process known as reforming – in which fossil fuels are mixed with steam, and heating the mixture to about 800°C which results in production of hydrogen and carbon-dioxide. The carbon dioxide is let into space where it contributes to global warming.
There are different ‘colors’ of hydrogen. Of course, the color simply denotes the way it is produced. The most common method of production is the one generated from natural gas – a fossil fuel – and this is grey hydrogen.
Hydrogen produced using lignite coal or oil as raw material is brown.
Hydrogen is also produced using bituminous coal – this is black.
All these processes result in emission of carbon dioxide and so they
are not the right way of using hydrogen towards zero emission or ‘going green’.
Green hydrogen is produced by using electricity generated by wind turbines or solar panels – zero carbon emission – to split water into hydrogen and oxygen by electrolysis – an expensive process. That is the reason why this is more expensive than the other grades.
The only alternative at present is blue hydrogen which is produced by using fossil fuels as raw materials, but the carbon dioxide is not let into the atmosphere.
Instead, it is captured and stored underground.
That’s the reason why blue hydrogen is cheaper than green –
but more expensive than the other grades noted above.
Generating Hydrogen from nuclear-generated electricity, or directly from
the heat from a high-temperature reactor, is possible and carbon-free. So far so good.
That is indeed green by most definitions, although some prefer to call it pink hydrogen, and they may or may not admit that it is also green by their definitions
but will probably just not answer the question.
Which is why the question is such a good one, but also hard to answer definitively.
It’s very good to replace the fossil fuel generated Hydrogen (grey Hydrogen) already
used in industry by Hydrogen produced from sustainable energy sources such as wind, solar and nuclear. Very good indeed.
It’s even good to reduce the carbon footprint of grey Hydrogen, and two proposals
for doing this are called blue Hydrogen and turquoise Hydrogen, and again it may
be educational to ask those promoting these proposals whether this Hydrogen will
also be green or grey or both or neither. But don’t expect a straight answer.
The lesson is you will not get one.
But using Hydrogen as a secondary energy source is another question entirely,
because electricity is so much better in this role, and will almost always have
a smaller environmental footprint. I know that’s not what you’ve been told.
Further Reading:
Lithium Prices Are Soaring, Putting Surge Battery Metals In The Sweet Spot…
Hydrogen Cars: What Are All I Need to Know About Hydrogen Fuel-Cell Cars?
Ford F-150 Lightning’s EPA Range Estimates Outpace Expectations (msn.com)
What You Need to Know about Buying Used Electric Vehicles
As gas prices rise, towns add electric car charging stations…
Your 101 Guide to Choosing the Right Electric Vehicle (EV)
As gas prices rise, towns add electric car charging stations
Why is blue hydrogen cheaper than green hydrogen?
Is Buying a Used Electric Vehicle a Good Idea?
The hydrogen energy dream (msn.com)