Would you have an EV without home charging?

[TheDeuce]

John87 said:

SWoll said:

EV and ICE don't depreciate at anything like the same rate though presently, so needs to be factored in if TCO is given as an advantage for running an EV. It's a far bigger number than the fuel savings, yet unsurprisingly many appear to be ignoring it

For the majority of those with an EV, they are leasing through a company or salary sacrifice so depreciation doesn't come into it. It's a fixed cost from the outset and cars with similar leasing costs will have similar depreciation.

I reckon the costs wouldn't be too dissimilar to an equivalent performance ICE car and there are a lot more rapid chargers on my commute than petrol stations. Even better if you use one of the subscription services which give a discount on certain networks.

In reality if my driveway disappeared overnight, I'd just get the train to work and have an older car for the weekend which wouldn't have the same requirements of comfort and reliability as I need at the moment.

Public charging is far cheaper than petrol IF you compare a performance EV to performance ICE and you actually make use of the performance - because the moment you enjoy a fast ICE car, you're looking at single digit MPG figures. The EV is also less efficient driven hard, but only marginally so.

[Olivera]

TheDeuce said:

A better question might be, would you buy a house without parking?

Of course, millions of people do, but likely not as a preference most of the time. There must be loads of things in life that are in some way less convenient/relaxed/easy of you have a terraced house or flat as opposed to detached house with drive and garage.

But we don't all get what we prefer all the time, we get what we can have and we make it work. Cars transitioning to electric is just one example of that.

A roundabout way of saying: "poor people without a drive: suck it up".

[TheDeuce]

Olivera said:

TheDeuce said:

A better question might be, would you buy a house without parking?

Of course, millions of people do, but likely not as a preference most of the time. There must be loads of things in life that are in some way less convenient/relaxed/easy of you have a terraced house or flat as opposed to detached house with drive and garage.

But we don't all get what we prefer all the time, we get what we can have and we make it work. Cars transitioning to electric is just one example of that.

A roundabout way of saying: "poor people without a drive: suck it up".

Not 'poor' people, just that you get what you pay for in life in general. It's not an EV thing, we all have to 'suck it up' when it comes to affordability vs desire.

We rent a boat on holiday quite often, we rent the one we can afford and are willing to pay for. I'd like one with a cocktail bar, brace of jet-ski's hanging out the back, a hot tub and 3 sun decks, but I can't afford one of those, so I don't get one.

I love my house, parking for 8 cars and loads of space, I can play loud music and upset nobody. I'd like the same house by the coast, but I can't have one because they cost twice as much.

[PSRG]

SWoll said:

EV and ICE don't depreciate at anything like the same rate though presently, so needs to be factored in if TCO is given as an advantage for running an EV. It's a far bigger number than the fuel savings, yet unsurprisingly many appear to be ignoring it.

Edited by SWoll on Friday 12th April 16:25

I'm not sure I have claimed that the EV had a TCO advantage? I just said that on a running cost and hassle basis I would chose an EV as a means for getting from A to B comfortably. And that's true whether it's cheaper, the same, or a bit more expensive than a petrol car.

As large petrol engined barges depreciate heavily anyway, whether an EV is worse is not going to influence my decison. Looking at a graph from Motorpoint after 4 years they've depreciated about 10% more than ICE. So on a £60k car that's £6k or £1,500 a year more - which I reckon would easily be offset by running cost savings, not that it bothers me!!

[Olivera]

TheDeuce said:

Not 'poor' people, just that you get what you pay for in life in general. It's not an EV thing, we all have to 'suck it up' when it comes to affordability vs desire.

We rent a boat on holiday quite often, we rent the one we can afford and are willing to pay for. I'd like one with a cocktail bar, brace of jet-ski's hanging out the back, a hot tub and 3 sun decks, but I can't afford one of those, so I don't get one.

I love my house, parking for 8 cars and loads of space, I can play loud music and upset nobody. I'd like the same house by the coast, but I can't have one because they cost twice as much.

You're remarkably flippant about a change that will be significantly regressive for mostly poorer members of society.

[TheDeuce]

Olivera said:

TheDeuce said:

Not 'poor' people, just that you get what you pay for in life in general. It's not an EV thing, we all have to 'suck it up' when it comes to affordability vs desire.

We rent a boat on holiday quite often, we rent the one we can afford and are willing to pay for. I'd like one with a cocktail bar, brace of jet-ski's hanging out the back, a hot tub and 3 sun decks, but I can't afford one of those, so I don't get one.

I love my house, parking for 8 cars and loads of space, I can play loud music and upset nobody. I'd like the same house by the coast, but I can't have one because they cost twice as much.

You're remarkably flippant about a change that will be significantly regressive for mostly poorer members of society.

I'm not flippant, or otherwise - I'm being realistic. It's entirely true that cheaper homes are cheaper for a variety of reasons - EV is just another to add to the list of things that could be better/easier if money was no issue.

Will it be regressive? By the time there is any actual need or pressure to switch, street chargers will very likely be abundant and solve the problem.

A lot of people in higher density housing areas that can't park are in high traffic areas too, will the far cleaner air not be progressive for them? Health vs convenience..?

[Evanivitch]

Shabaza said:

If you live near a tesla super charger and have free charging for life deal.

Otherwise no

This probably, put also possibly if I didn't have charging for life but did have consistent 250kW charging.

Plenty of places I visit have rapids and destination charges to truckle charge at.

[Olivera]

TheDeuce said:

Snipped

It's a matter of fact that it's a regressive change, and I find it highly unlikely that on street chargers will have widespread nationwide rollout in only 10 years.

Pontification on this matter from relatively privileged EV fans is devoid from reality.

[SWoll]

John87 said:

For the majority of those with an EV, they are leasing through a company or salary sacrifice so depreciation doesn't come into it. It's a fixed cost from the outset and cars with similar leasing costs will have similar depreciation.

I reckon the costs wouldn't be too dissimilar to an equivalent performance ICE car and there are a lot more rapid chargers on my commute than petrol stations. Even better if you use one of the subscription services which give a discount on certain networks.

In reality if my driveway disappeared overnight, I'd just get the train to work and have an older car for the weekend which wouldn't have the same requirements of comfort and reliability as I need at the moment.

Have a look at current lease prices. Risk and deprecation obviously play the largest factors, so you can imagine where things stand with EV's at the minute. This does filter down into company car and SS costs at the end of the day, they're just currently being masked by BIK savings and other tax savigs.

Here's a example. Both £60k, 400hp saloon cars, Both 3 year, 30k mile deals.

PSRG said:

As large petrol engined barges depreciate heavily anyway, whether an EV is worse is not going to influence my decison. Looking at a graph from Motorpoint after 4 years they've depreciated about 10% more than ICE. So on a £60k car that's £6k or £1,500 a year more - which I reckon would easily be offset by running cost savings, not that it bothers me!!

When is that graph from, as doesn't represent the reality of where prices are today?

Edited by SWoll on Friday 12th April 17:56

[TheDeuce]

Olivera said:

TheDeuce said:

Snipped

It's a matter of fact that it's a regressive change, and I find it highly unlikely that on street chargers will have widespread nationwide rollout in only 10 years.

Pontification on this matter from relatively privileged EV fans is devoid from reality.

Nonsense, I don't come from any sort of privileged background, we were easily below the average wealth level when I was growing up. Probably lower 20% actually. I also don't believe most EV drivers are particularly wealthy today, they have them as company cars. The used prices of the cars reflect what the average person can afford to actually own one, and as such used EV stock can't keep up with buyer demand.

If come 2035 and people do actually need to move to an EV for reasons of availability, to avoid fines etc, and there is not a robust street level charging infrastructure, or some other solution, I would indeed agree the forced change was regressive. But we're not at that point yet so there is no point arguing that particular aspect of EV ownership 'today'.

Perhaps in the future the lowest income homes won't be able to afford personal transport? Perhaps they will, as many do today? Who knows... The world is always changing and none of us have a god given right to expect that what we could have yesterday will always be attainable tomorrow.

[Nomme de Plum]

Olivera said:

TheDeuce said:

Snipped

It's a matter of fact that it's a regressive change, and I find it highly unlikely that on street chargers will have widespread nationwide rollout in only 10 years.

Pontification on this matter from relatively privileged EV fans is devoid from reality.

Early adoption for advanced technology is always top down. How many people had a car phone or brick phone in the 80s' early 90s. Now even people of very limited means have smart phones which is perfectly normal. You can apply it to computers, laptops flatscreen TVs. They are all similar interms of technology adoption.

We trade about 7.4M vehicles annually and about 1.9M of them are new and of those only 45% private. The average used vehicle trade is circa £8-£10K.

So currently there are just 1M EVs out of 33M cars on our roads. The used affordable pool is woefully low but it doesn't matter there is no need for the less well off to one anywhere near an EV unless they make a conscious choice.

In 2035 there will still only be 15.7M EVs so still less than 50% of the cars on our roads. That is still 11 years away so I'm suggesting it will be at least 15 years before those at the lower end feel any pressure to move to an EV but there will still be several million old ICEs about for the shed drivers.

15 years is a long time to sort out an adequate charging infrastructure with a degree of completion to help drive the price down. That's even before councils provide on street charging on which they can make a small profit.

Why some are getting so vexed now, in 2024, seems very odd.

[Nomme de Plum]

SWoll said:

John87 said:

For the majority of those with an EV, they are leasing through a company or salary sacrifice so depreciation doesn't come into it. It's a fixed cost from the outset and cars with similar leasing costs will have similar depreciation.

I reckon the costs wouldn't be too dissimilar to an equivalent performance ICE car and there are a lot more rapid chargers on my commute than petrol stations. Even better if you use one of the subscription services which give a discount on certain networks.

In reality if my driveway disappeared overnight, I'd just get the train to work and have an older car for the weekend which wouldn't have the same requirements of comfort and reliability as I need at the moment.

Have a look at current lease prices. Risk and deprecation obviously play the largest factors, so you can imagine where things stand with EV's at the minute. This does filter down into company car and SS costs at the end of the day, they're just currently being masked by BIK savings and other tax savigs.

Here's a example. Both £60k, 400hp saloon cars, Both 3 year, 30k mile deals.

PSRG said:

As large petrol engined barges depreciate heavily anyway, whether an EV is worse is not going to influence my decison. Looking at a graph from Motorpoint after 4 years they've depreciated about 10% more than ICE. So on a £60k car that's £6k or £1,500 a year more - which I reckon would easily be offset by running cost savings, not that it bothers me!!

When is that graph from, as doesn't represent the reality of where prices are today?

Edited by SWoll on Friday 12th April 17:56

Surely you should compare purchase price and residual not a lease deal.

These lease deals will always be skewed by the model, manufactures contribution, etc etc.

We used to buy are company cars from profit so no financing. As an individual now I'd never buy new. It makes no sense and I've reverted to what i did in my 20s. Still cash and no finance.

[TheDeuce]

Nomme de Plum said:

Olivera said:

TheDeuce said:

Snipped

It's a matter of fact that it's a regressive change, and I find it highly unlikely that on street chargers will have widespread nationwide rollout in only 10 years.

Pontification on this matter from relatively privileged EV fans is devoid from reality.

Early adoption for advanced technology is always top down. How many people had a car phone or brick phone in the 80s' early 90s. Now even people of very limited means have smart phones which is perfectly normal. You can apply it to computers, laptops flatscreen TVs. They are all similar interms of technology adoption.

We trade about 7.4M vehicles annually and about 1.9M of them are new and of those only 45% private. The average used vehicle trade is circa £8-£10K.

So currently there are just 1M EVs out of 33M cars on our roads. The used affordable pool is woefully low but it doesn't matter there is no need for the less well off to one anywhere near an EV unless they make a conscious choice.

In 2035 there will still only be 15.7M EVs so still less than 50% of the cars on our roads. That is still 11 years away so I'm suggesting it will be at least 15 years before those at the lower end feel any pressure to move to an EV but there will still be several million old ICEs about for the shed drivers.

15 years is a long time to sort out an adequate charging infrastructure with a degree of completion to help drive the price down. That's even before councils provide on street charging on which they can make a small profit.

Why some are getting so vexed now, in 2024, seems very odd.

Because it's a change that's beyond their own control and not a welcome one - at least I imagine that's the perception many people have when it comes to what they read/hear about the oncoming EV storm...

In reality, you're quite right. If you don't actively want an EV, just don't get one! Ignore the whole EV thing, we'll all be dead before the number of old ICE cars for sale diminishes to the point they're hard or expensive to come by for anyone that really, really, doesn't want an electric car.

[OutInTheShed]

If i was in either of my earlier homes with no off-street parking, yes I'd still have an EV if it was the best all-round solution.
That might mean it was cheap and there was a viable charging solution, which could be done in a work car park for instance.
My brother for a while before covid rented a space in a private car park near his place of work. Things like that would be a great opportunity for a park'n'charge business.

I do think that most towns and cities would be better with less cars..

Would I want an EV today if I couldn't charge at home? No!

But it would only rake a few changes to change that, like I needed to drive into a ZEZ, some better EVs were cheaper and my travel patterns were compatible with some sort of convenient charging. Or IC cars taxed to buggery perhaps?

I have at times lived without a car. With a motorbike (or two) and a contract job do-able by train, I was happy being a one-car couple for a while.

[TheDeuce]

OutInTheShed said:

If i was in either of my earlier homes with no off-street parking, yes I'd still have an EV if it was the best all-round solution.
That might mean it was cheap and there was a viable charging solution, which could be done in a work car park for instance.
My brother for a while before covid rented a space in a private car park near his place of work. Things like that would be a great opportunity for a park'n'charge business.

I do think that most towns and cities would be better with less cars..

Would I want an EV today if I couldn't charge at home? No!

But it would only rake a few changes to change that, like I needed to drive into a ZEZ, some better EVs were cheaper and my travel patterns were compatible with some sort of convenient charging. Or IC cars taxed to buggery perhaps?

I have at times lived without a car. With a motorbike (or two) and a contract job do-able by train, I was happy being a one-car couple for a while.

Good attitude. The world changes, your circumstances change.. be flexible.

Possibly some streets won't ever get local and convenient EV charging sorted, so if in that distant future a person still wants a car and EV is the only viable choice for whatever reason, move house or find an alternative to personal transport.

We may move house soon if a certain housing company gets planning permission to build an estate on our doorstep! It's not great news if that happens and I won't like it very much, but I don't believe I have an endless and automatic right to expect the rest of the world to stand still so that I can always enjoy my current house as much as the day I moved in - even if the thing that spoils it is beyond my control and wasn't ever expected.

I'm also often frustrated that Mrs Deuce and I now share a car, but we both WFH mostly these days and it makes sense. It's not as convenient as it was when we had two cars sometimes... but mostly its perfectly workable and with some small adjustments it's just not a problem that justifies a second car.

As and when we move to Greece, we'll quite possibly have no car and two electric bikes.

[Nomme de Plum]

TheDeuce said:

Nomme de Plum said:

Olivera said:

TheDeuce said:

Snipped

It's a matter of fact that it's a regressive change, and I find it highly unlikely that on street chargers will have widespread nationwide rollout in only 10 years.

Pontification on this matter from relatively privileged EV fans is devoid from reality.

Early adoption for advanced technology is always top down. How many people had a car phone or brick phone in the 80s' early 90s. Now even people of very limited means have smart phones which is perfectly normal. You can apply it to computers, laptops flatscreen TVs. They are all similar interms of technology adoption.

We trade about 7.4M vehicles annually and about 1.9M of them are new and of those only 45% private. The average used vehicle trade is circa £8-£10K.

So currently there are just 1M EVs out of 33M cars on our roads. The used affordable pool is woefully low but it doesn't matter there is no need for the less well off to one anywhere near an EV unless they make a conscious choice.

In 2035 there will still only be 15.7M EVs so still less than 50% of the cars on our roads. That is still 11 years away so I'm suggesting it will be at least 15 years before those at the lower end feel any pressure to move to an EV but there will still be several million old ICEs about for the shed drivers.

15 years is a long time to sort out an adequate charging infrastructure with a degree of completion to help drive the price down. That's even before councils provide on street charging on which they can make a small profit.

Why some are getting so vexed now, in 2024, seems very odd.

Because it's a change that's beyond their own control and not a welcome one - at least I imagine that's the perception many people have when it comes to what they read/hear about the oncoming EV storm...

In reality, you're quite right. If you don't actively want an EV, just don't get one! Ignore the whole EV thing, we'll all be dead before the number of old ICE cars for sale diminishes to the point they're hard or expensive to come by for anyone that really, really, doesn't want an electric car.

They may perceive a storm but storm it is not. It is a very gradual change over 25 years. It will be nine years after 2035 before the 15.7M pre + 18M post reach the 33M cars we have assuming no growth. The shed drivers will still be able to buy their £2-£5K ICE cars albeit there ill be plenty of similar priced EVs then.

The very poorest don't have cars anyway so this will not impact them one way or another or just maybe we will have cheap short term hire EVs like Boris bikes but that like public transport is a different subject completely.

[SWoll]

Nomme de Plum said:

Surely you should compare purchase price and residual not a lease deal.

These lease deals will always be skewed by the model, manufactures contribution, etc etc.

We used to buy are company cars from profit so no financing. As an individual now I'd never buy new. It makes no sense and I've reverted to what i did in my 20s. Still cash and no finance.

The purpose was to show that lease costs for similar value and performance vehicles are hugely more expensive for the EV.

You can compare residuals as well of course.

[PSRG]

SWoll said:

When is that graph from, as doesn't represent the reality of where prices are today?

Edited by SWoll on Friday 12th April 17:56

The graph is from Motorpoint a few weeks ago, though the source of the data isn’t identified. Nevertheless, what’s always been true is that expensive ‘mass market’ cars have always depreciated a lot, and the fact that now those cars are EVs means they too have high depreciation. But, are they deprecating a lot because they are expensive, or because they are EVs?

https://www.motorpoint.co.uk/guides/electric-car-d...

[ColdoRS]

No.

I've ran an EV as a daily/family car since 2019 and can confirm it would be a pain and require a change of routine to keep it charged if we couldn't charge at home. It wouldn't be worth it for us.

I know a couple of people who do. Uncle-in-Law being one, he does about 50 miles a week if he's lucky so parking it on a public charger for a couple of hours whilst he walks the dog isn't a problem.

The other guy makes it work however I have heard him complain about it from time to time so it's clearly not perfect for him.

[Mars]

I said no (and I do have an EV) but equally I wouldn't have a home without a drive and garage.