The guilt, buy another ICE vehicle or move to EV

[Goanywhere]

Hello fellow mustachians

My wife has a mid-size SUV which is a couple of years old and is the vehicle we primarily use to cart our children around / go on road trips etc.

My car - which is used for commuting - is a very sensible 4 cylinder, manual, hatchback. It is a 2013 model and done around 80,000 miles. 

This car has been perfectly fine until recently when I've started to share in the childcare dropoff/pick up routine with my wife. To do this we've had to add two car seats which means the driver and passenger seats need to be so far forward that it is uncomfortable ride for anyone taller than say 5'7.

As a result we are thinking about upgrading my car to something larger.  This is where the guilt sets in.  The mustachian in me says, spend as little as possible and buy another secondhand ICE vehicle (as long as it is safe).  However,  we are also environmentally conscious and in the long term I see ICE vehicles being replaced by EVs. 

So I guess my question is, has anyone else considered whether they just bite the bullet and buy a new EV? And if so, how did you justify it to yourself.

The EV we are considering is a Telsa model Y. 

Appreciate any thoughts.

[nereo]

Well, in terms of ‘mustachianism’ - at this forum’s core is environmentalism, and Pete’s been a huge proponent of EVs.  Another key message is that conscientious spending; it’s not about buying the cheapest option, but making sure what you do spend money on matches your values and improves your quality of life.

So if you have the financial means and can suffer through a multi-month wait for an EV I see no reason why you should want another ICE vehicle.  As vechiles* go, it’s far better for the environment even after accounting for the production of the battery back, and it will reduce your overall carbon footprint and be better for your kids’ future.

Ironically, with subsidies and rebates and the cost of ongoing maintenence and energy (plus the absolute bat-crazy prices in the used car market right now), buying a NEW EV may actually be cheaper over a multi-year period than buying a gently used ICE vehicle right now. I’m seeing new BEVs sell (after rebates) for less than 3 year old equivalent models with 40k miles on the dash.

Of course, I should mention that the best option is to reduce driving as much as possible.

[reeshau]

Re-using an ICE car (I.e buying used) is more environmentally friendly than causing a new EV to be born.

[RWD]

The EV we are considering is a Telsa model Y. 

Just make sure to cross-shop with some of the cheaper alternatives (VW ID.4/Audi Q4-e-tron, Ford Mach-E, Hyundai Ioniq 5/Kia EV6/Genesis GV60). For example, after incentives the ID.4 is about half the cost of a Model Y.

[nereo]

Re-using an ICE car (I.e buying used) is more environmentally friendly than causing a new EV to be born.

Only if the ICE vehicle is scrapped entirely, which it won't be. The lifecycle doesn't end with one person's ownership, it just goes to another owner.

On the other hand, buying an EV supports the burgeoning market and the maturation of the charging network, which gets us closer to climate goals.

It's a net environmental benefit to sell your ICE and buy an EV.

[as always, the 'best' solution remains drive less and consume less]

[reeshau]

Re-using an ICE car (I.e buying used) is more environmentally friendly than causing a new EV to be born.

Only if the ICE vehicle is scrapped entirely, which it won't be. The lifecycle doesn't end with one person's ownership, it just goes to another owner.

On the other hand, buying an EV supports the burgeoning market and the maturation of the charging network, which gets us closer to climate goals.

It's a net environmental benefit to sell your ICE and buy an EV.

[as always, the 'best' solution remains drive less and consume less]

I agree with your comments on moving the cause forward.

But I disagree with your assessment of the direct environmental impact.  A large part of an EV's impact is in the production, particularly the mining behind the battery materials.  While you can't avoid this if you are switching to EV's, it should not be dismissed out of hand.

A used car has had its production "sins" paid for by the first buyer.  Running maintenance only, the breakeven period on environmental impact would be significant.

As you say, the best thing would be to just drive less.  Perhaps the next best thing, environmentally speaking, would be to scrap the ICE car and buy a used EV.  Of course, that has economic costs.

[nereo]

Re-using an ICE car (I.e buying used) is more environmentally friendly than causing a new EV to be born.

Only if the ICE vehicle is scrapped entirely, which it won't be. The lifecycle doesn't end with one person's ownership, it just goes to another owner.

On the other hand, buying an EV supports the burgeoning market and the maturation of the charging network, which gets us closer to climate goals.

It's a net environmental benefit to sell your ICE and buy an EV.

[as always, the 'best' solution remains drive less and consume less]

I agree with your comments on moving the cause forward.

But I disagree with your assessment of the direct environmental impact.  A large part of an EV's impact is in the production, particularly the mining behind the battery materials.  While you can't avoid this if you are switching to EV's, it should not be dismissed out of hand.

A used car has had its production "sins" paid for by the first buyer.  Running maintenance only, the breakeven period on environmental impact would be significant.

As you say, the best thing would be to just drive less.  Perhaps the next best thing, environmentally speaking, would be to scrap the ICE car and buy a used EV.  Of course, that has economic costs.

That's not how the accounting works. You follow the lifecycle of the item, not the owner.  It doesn't matter whether you are the first owner or the fifth. Likewise, if you are buying a 5-year-old BEV you don't get to ignore that vehicle had a large environmental manufacturing cost and attribute it entirely to the previous owner(s), claiming only the 'good' environmental parts of the EV. 

[bacchi]

Re-using an ICE car (I.e buying used) is more environmentally friendly than causing a new EV to be born.

Only if the ICE vehicle is scrapped entirely, which it won't be. The lifecycle doesn't end with one person's ownership, it just goes to another owner.

On the other hand, buying an EV supports the burgeoning market and the maturation of the charging network, which gets us closer to climate goals.

It's a net environmental benefit to sell your ICE and buy an EV.

[as always, the 'best' solution remains drive less and consume less]

I agree with your comments on moving the cause forward.

But I disagree with your assessment of the direct environmental impact.  A large part of an EV's impact is in the production, particularly the mining behind the battery materials.  While you can't avoid this if you are switching to EV's, it should not be dismissed out of hand.

A used car has had its production "sins" paid for by the first buyer.  Running maintenance only, the breakeven period on environmental impact would be significant.

As you say, the best thing would be to just drive less.  Perhaps the next best thing, environmentally speaking, would be to scrap the ICE car and buy a used EV.  Of course, that has economic costs.

It may actually be better to junk a 2010 ICE, with ~5-10 years of driving left, and upgrade.

See Figure 5 at https://sustain.ubc.ca/sites/default/files/2018-63%20Lifecycle%20Analysis%20of%20Electric%20Vehicles_Kukreja.pdf

That's for 150k km. Let's assume the Focus can make it another 65k km (=133k miles total).

The operational costs are 253 gCO2/km or 16.4k grams for that 65k km. The total cost for a new i-MiEV for that 65k km is 13.1k grams.


tl;dr Operational costs for a lot of ICEs dwarf the total costs for an EV very rapidly. https://about.bnef.com/blog/the-lifecycle-emissions-of-electric-vehicles/


Edit: That's an unfair switch. The i-MiEV is not the same class of car as the Focus. The point remains that junking an ICE with a lot of life left may still be better.

[JLee]

Have you considered the Bolt / Bolt EUV?

https://www.motortrend.com/news/2023-chevrolet-bolt-ev-euv-price-msrp/

[reeshau]

That's not how the accounting works. You follow the lifecycle of the item, not the owner.  It doesn't matter whether you are the first owner or the fifth. Likewise, if you are buying a 5-year-old BEV you don't get to ignore that vehicle had a large environmental manufacturing cost and attribute it entirely to the previous owner(s), claiming only the 'good' environmental parts of the EV.

Then why on earth would anyone reuse or recycle anything?

The decision criteria is what in front of you; what happened before cannot be changed, and is irrelevant.  (the sunk cost fallacy)

If I were to think in total item terms, as you suggest, then:

We should dispose of all antique furniture, which was created with virgin timber, unsustainable harvested.

I should throw out all my old tools, which came from iron ore from a strip mine, and were fired with coal.

Again, in the macro sense, there is a reason to consider what is being created new, and even secondary users can drive demand.  But in a micro sense, there are all sorts of crazy decisions you can come to if you think of the irretrievable past.

In the case you present, then yes the person who bought and disposed of a 5-year-old EV , probably to buy a new one, is incredibly wasteful.  And choosing to buy the 5 year old EV is decisively a better environmental decision than to also buy a new one.

[JLee]

That's not how the accounting works. You follow the lifecycle of the item, not the owner.  It doesn't matter whether you are the first owner or the fifth. Likewise, if you are buying a 5-year-old BEV you don't get to ignore that vehicle had a large environmental manufacturing cost and attribute it entirely to the previous owner(s), claiming only the 'good' environmental parts of the EV.

Then why on earth would anyone reuse or recycle anything?

The decision criteria is what in front of you; what happened before cannot be changed, and is irrelevant.  (the sunk cost fallacy)

If I were to think in total item terms, as you suggest, then:

We should dispose of all antique furniture, which was created with virgin timber, unsustainable harvested.

I should throw out all my old tools, which came from iron ore from a strip mine, and were fired with coal.

Again, in the macro sense, there is a reason to consider what is being created new, and even secondary users can drive demand.  But in a micro sense, there are all sorts of crazy decisions you can come to if you think of the irretrievable past.

In the case you present, then yes the person who bought and disposed of a 5-year-old EV , probably to buy a new one, is incredibly wasteful.  And choosing to buy the 5 year old EV is decisively a better environmental decision than to also buy a new one.

Every example you provided is of something that has already paid its environmental cost.  An ICE vehicle continues to pay every time its driven.

[reeshau]

It may actually be better to junk a 2010 ICE, with ~5-10 years of driving left, and upgrade.

See Figure 5 at https://sustain.ubc.ca/sites/default/files/2018-63%20Lifecycle%20Analysis%20of%20Electric%20Vehicles_Kukreja.pdf

That's for 150k km. Let's assume the Focus can make it another 65k km (=133k miles total).

The operational costs are 253 gCO2/km or 16.4k grams for that 65k km. The total cost for a new i-MiEV for that 65k km is 13.1k grams.


tl;dr Operational costs for a lot of ICEs dwarf the total costs for an EV very rapidly. https://about.bnef.com/blog/the-lifecycle-emissions-of-electric-vehicles/


Edit: That's an unfair switch. The i-MiEV is not the same class of car as the Focus. The point remains that junking an ICE with a lot of life left may still be better.

I don't dispute these figures, but I would point out this is new-vs.-new.  In a new vs. used decision, I would say you need to take out the creation costs of the vehicle, which already exists, and compare that to your new EV purchase.

Of course, used vs. used is even more lopsided toward an EV, by the same argument.

[affordablehousing]

It sounds like you just want to buy a Tesla. You should, I'm worried Elon might run out of money.

Or, you could just find a car seat that fits better.

[bacchi]

It may actually be better to junk a 2010 ICE, with ~5-10 years of driving left, and upgrade.

See Figure 5 at https://sustain.ubc.ca/sites/default/files/2018-63%20Lifecycle%20Analysis%20of%20Electric%20Vehicles_Kukreja.pdf

That's for 150k km. Let's assume the Focus can make it another 65k km (=133k miles total).

The operational costs are 253 gCO2/km or 16.4k grams for that 65k km. The total cost for a new i-MiEV for that 65k km is 13.1k grams.


tl;dr Operational costs for a lot of ICEs dwarf the total costs for an EV very rapidly. https://about.bnef.com/blog/the-lifecycle-emissions-of-electric-vehicles/


Edit: That's an unfair switch. The i-MiEV is not the same class of car as the Focus. The point remains that junking an ICE with a lot of life left may still be better.

I don't dispute these figures, but I would point out this is new-vs.-new.  In a new vs. used decision, I would say you need to take out the creation costs of the vehicle, which already exists, and compare that to your new EV purchase.

Of course, used vs. used is even more lopsided toward an EV, by the same argument.

Figure 5 has the creation costs separated out from the operational costs. It's Y axis is grams/km.

In the case of the Focus vs i-MiEV, a used Focus emits more CO2 over its end life (from 150k-215k km) than buying a new i-MiEV and driving it for 65k km. Its operational costs are more than the total costs of the EV, including creation and operational costs from 0-65k km.

[Paper Chaser]

What's your daily drive like? Distance? Weather? High speed freeway driving, or grid locked traffic? How many days per week?

A PHEV can be better for the environment than a full EV if we're taking a societal view rather than an individual one. If you're not doing a ton of miles each day, then a new PHEV would give you most or all of the EV benefits, with a much lower environmental impact from production.

For example, the Model Y you're considering has at least a 75kwh battery pack. If you drive 10k miles per year, then 100% of your miles driven would be done in EV mode. So you're using 75kwh of rare battery materials to replace 10k miles of ICE driving with EV driving. After 5 years, you've replaced 50k ICE miles with 50k EV miles. After 10 years, you've fully replaced 100k ICE miles with EV miles. This probably makes the owner feel good about their efforts. But what happens if we divided that 75kwh of battery materials among more than 1 vehicle?

A Rav 4 Prime (PHEV) has 42miles of EV range from an 18kwh battery pack. So with the same 50 mile drive, the PHEV does ~ 80% of it's miles as EV and 20% as ICE. So 8k EV miles per year and 2k ICE miles. After 5 years, you've replaced 40k ICE miles with EV miles.
That's not as good as fully replacing all of your individual 50k miles, but the much smaller battery capacity means the remaining raw materials can go towards other vehicles. The 75kwh of raw battery materials needed for the Model Y can be spread out among 4 Rav 4 Primes. So if each of them is also doing 80% of their miles as an EV, then each year there are 32k ICE miles replaced by ICE. At the 5 year mark, there are 160k ICe miles replaced by EV miles, and a decade later, the multiple PHEVs have replaced 320k ICE miles with EV miles using the same amount of raw battery materials as the single Model Y that only replaced 100k miles of ICE driving.

Obviously the math changes depending on the electric range of the specific PHEV you choose and of course the amount and type of driving that you do. But the larger point is that with current battery tech, battery materials are not easy to come by, and pretty harmful to obtain/turn into functional batteries. As a planet, our goal should be to replace as many ICE miles with EV miles as possible, while using as little raw material as possible. Full EVs with 250+ miles of range are actually somewhat counter productive to that goal because they hoard a bunch of harmful battery materials into a single battery pack that's rarely used to it's full capacity. Spreading out those raw materials among as many vehicles as we can (PHEVs) not only has larger environmental benefit, but it occurs faster and with less hesitation from consumers who (rightfully or not) have concerns about range/charging infrastructure/etc. It's understandable to want to replace your ICE with an EV so that 100% of the miles that you drive are converted into EV miles. But I'd argue that hauling around that unused battery capacity comes with a significant environmental cost as well, and that PHEVs can be considered the more environmentally conscious choice.

The PHEVs can also be significantly less expensive too. A Model Y currently starts at $65k and has no tax credit available. A Rav 4 Prime or Santa Fe PHEV start just over $40k with some amount of credit. A Pacifica Hybrid minivan would be way more practical/functional at moving people and things for $50k. That's not including smaller and cheaper PHEV options like the Ford Escape, Kia Niro, Hyundai Tuscon, etc.

[Sibley]

You're going to buy a new car because the car seats are taking up too much space in the back. Have you looked at different car seats that would fit better? Way cheaper in the long run.

[RWD]

A Rav 4 Prime [..] with some amount of credit.

Credits are already expiring for Toyota as well.

[Morning Glory]

Why don't you just switch cars with your wife on days that you have the kids?

[Fru-Gal]

+1 on sharing wife’s car

If you’re feeling guilty allow me to compound the feeling by suggesting that instead of chauffeuring, you give your children some amazing life lessons by teaching them to use public transit or getting an electric bike that can carry the two of them or all three of you riding bikes to school.

Source: Me, now with resilient, responsible and resourceful grown kids

[achvfi]

+1 on sharing wife’s car

If you’re feeling guilty allow me to compound the feeling by suggesting that instead of chauffeuring, you give your children some amazing life lessons by teaching them to use public transit or getting an electric bike that can carry the two of them or all three of you riding bikes to school.

Source: Me, now with resilient, responsible and resourceful grown kids

+1 on sharing wife car as well. That's how we do it. We designated a minivan for kids, it goes where kids go. If other partner needs to go else where we take other car.

Much more responsible and efficient than 67 thousand dollar model Y purchase.

[Paper Chaser]

A Rav 4 Prime [..] with some amount of credit.

Credits are already expiring for Toyota as well.

Just to clarify for other readers, the tax credits are gradually phased out with lesser and lesser amounts as a manufacturer sells more and more plug in vehicles. So while Toyota may no longer qualify for the full tax credit, they should still qualify for a partial one whereas Tesla no longer gets any amount of federal credit. The specific amount of the credit will depend on the EV range of the vehicle and the manufacturer.

[reeshau]

A Rav 4 Prime [..] with some amount of credit.

Credits are already expiring for Toyota as well.

Just to clarify for other readers, the tax credits are gradually phased out with lesser and lesser amounts as a manufacturer sells more and more plug in vehicles. So while Toyota may no longer qualify for the full tax credit, they should still qualify for a partial one whereas Tesla no longer gets any amount of federal credit. The specific amount of the credit will depend on the EV range of the vehicle and the manufacturer.

This will change when the new rules in the Inflation Reduction Act take effect, including the volume phase out.  Coming, though, are price and buyer income caps and domestic content minimums.

https://jalopnik.com/several-evs-lose-federal-tax-credit-perk-in-the-senates-1849386879

[bryan995]

Model Y buying strategies with the new tax credit coming into play.
https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/tax-credit-and-model-y-delivery.275286/

[AccidentialMustache]

EVs have a lot more space on the interior than you'd expect for the size, because of the battery-in-the-floor effect. If you do buy, check out smaller EVs like the bolt, because they'll be bigger inside than you expect. I fit behind myself in the fit (driver's seat max aft, but fairly upright), but the kid's rear facing seat had to be passenger side, because it and I didn't fit. It might have fit in the bolt, because I could dance back there behind "myself."

Plus you can get them used, you aren't in a panic so you can look for a good deal, and Chevy already dropped the price because they phased-out of the old credit. It'll be a real bad look to hike it -- they might, but they probably won't qualify because of battery sourcing next year, so if I were them and thought I'd make any profit at the lower price, I'd just leave it there rather than getting that bad PR.

[Tester]

Hello fellow mustachians

My wife has a mid-size SUV which is a couple of years old and is the vehicle we primarily use to cart our children around / go on road trips etc.

My car - which is used for commuting - is a very sensible 4 cylinder, manual, hatchback. It is a 2013 model and done around 80,000 miles. 

This car has been perfectly fine until recently when I've started to share in the childcare dropoff/pick up routine with my wife. To do this we've had to add two car seats which means the driver and passenger seats need to be so far forward that it is uncomfortable ride for anyone taller than say 5'7.

As a result we are thinking about upgrading my car to something larger.  This is where the guilt sets in.  The mustachian in me says, spend as little as possible and buy another secondhand ICE vehicle (as long as it is safe).  However,  we are also environmentally conscious and in the long term I see ICE vehicles being replaced by EVs. 

So I guess my question is, has anyone else considered whether they just bite the bullet and buy a new EV? And if so, how did you justify it to yourself.

The EV we are considering is a Telsa model Y. 

Appreciate any thoughts.

I might be late to the party but I have to ask:

Are the child seats rear facing? If yes then I might understand.

If not, I have a 2015 Golf GTI with a 4 year old in the back and the chair (front facing) is fitting perfectly without impacting the way I sit.
The Golf is tiny compared to the other cars on the road, mentioned the model so you can have an idea of the size.
I am 6 feet tall (but I have a driving position which most people would call too close to the steering wheel).

If you "have" to buy an EV "just" because the child seats don't fit in the current car you might look at other options than the Model Y (especially because it seems a big spend when you think what car you will be replacing)? That way you go for the long term EV without paying crazy money (for me at least) on a car.

Disclaimer: The Golf GTI is NOT a mustachian car and it is NOT a green car. But, it is small and was relatively cheap though as I bought it used and with a lot of miles.
Until now it serves its purpose perfectly.

[bryan995]

We have 3 kids, all in car seats, and are also in need of a larger vehicle for carting them around + strollers + etc etc.
The rear facing car seats are a nightmare to fit.

Ended up going with the Ford F150 Lightning EV.
(our other vehicle is the 7 seater model Y standard range - we all fit, but its tight, we use uppababy car-seats)

F150 Lightning, XLT trim, Standard Range battery = $52k msrp - $7500 credit - $2000 state credit = $42,500 all in

And yet again, we continue living in this bizzarro world where "investing" in new EVs pays dividends.  Demand is still through the roof, and trucks are selling for $15-$30k over MSRP.
Plus Ford just raised the MSRP another $8000 for the 23' model year...

So the price of buying new stings a bit less.
We take delivery sometime next week (1.74% 60 month loan)

[RWD]

Ended up going with the Ford F150 Lightning EV.

That's incredible you've been able to secure one, demand has been crazy. Ford just raised the price for the XLT to ~$59k too, so it's good you were able to get one earlier.

[ChpBstrd]

Gotta dish out a facepunch. Sorry, but you'll thank me when you're wealthier.

If you are going from an economical hatchback to a $70k luxury automobile, then I think the seat space and the environment are both excuses. What you actually want is a luxury status symbol vehicle, and that's what the Tesla is.

As noted above, you could consider a Chevy Bolt for less than half the price of a Model Y. According to legroom.org, the Bolt offers 36 inches of rear legroom, which compares favorably with the 34.5" in a 2013 Fit or 33.3" in a Yaris 5-door. The Nissan Versa and Mazda 3 also offer 37" and 36" respectively. If you need even more than that, a Camry hybrid offers 38" with a 5-year total cost of ownership of "only" $30k.

https://www.edmunds.com/tco.html

The facepunch is justified because we're talking about dropping $70k to relieve the inconvenience of bending your legs during a few trips per week, and this inconvenience will only last for the next couple of years at most, and it could be solved for a fraction of that cost in other ways. Is retirement a goal, or is being lounged out during short drives the goal?

You're not looking around at all the options to resolve the legroom inconveniences; you're running straight to the luxury car. 

[JLee]

Ended up going with the Ford F150 Lightning EV.

That's incredible you've been able to secure one, demand has been crazy. Ford just raised the price for the XLT to ~$59k too, so it's good you were able to get one earlier.

Blows my mind how some people manage to get lucky and just go find one at MSRP.  I reserved on launch night (May 2021), ordered in February 2022, and am still expecting delivery sometime this month.

[bryan995]

Ended up going with the Ford F150 Lightning EV.

That's incredible you've been able to secure one, demand has been crazy. Ford just raised the price for the XLT to ~$59k too, so it's good you were able to get one earlier.

Blows my mind how some people manage to get lucky and just go find one at MSRP.  I reserved on launch night (May 2021), ordered in February 2022, and am still expecting delivery sometime this month.

I think very few (no one) is walking into a MSRP purchase.
Same story for me, reserved on launch night 05/19/21, ordered on 1/20/22, assigned build group 05/30/2022, built 07/02/22, shipped 07/29/22 and now it is on a train to CA. 

It is currently in Wyoming somewhere (someone on the same train has their fordpass activated, so they can track movement via gps :))

[MoneyTree]

Gotta dish out a facepunch. Sorry, but you'll thank me when you're wealthier.

If you are going from an economical hatchback to a $70k luxury automobile, then I think the seat space and the environment are both excuses. What you actually want is a luxury status symbol vehicle, and that's what the Tesla is.

As noted above, you could consider a Chevy Bolt for less than half the price of a Model Y. According to legroom.org, the Bolt offers 36 inches of rear legroom, which compares favorably with the 34.5" in a 2013 Fit or 33.3" in a Yaris 5-door. The Nissan Versa and Mazda 3 also offer 37" and 36" respectively. If you need even more than that, a Camry hybrid offers 38" with a 5-year total cost of ownership of "only" $30k.

https://www.edmunds.com/tco.html

The facepunch is justified because we're talking about dropping $70k to relieve the inconvenience of bending your legs during a few trips per week, and this inconvenience will only last for the next couple of years at most, and it could be solved for a fraction of that cost in other ways. Is retirement a goal, or is being lounged out during short drives the goal?

You're not looking around at all the options to resolve the legroom inconveniences; you're running straight to the luxury car.

Gotta agree with ^ChpBstrd here. really sounds like you want to get a Tesla and this is a convenient reason to do so.

You already have 2 cars, one of which could fit the kids perfectly fine with no discomfort. Switch cars if you need to take the kids.

Ok fine, you are ok with splurging a bit, and have the convenience of having 2 cars that can both take the kids without having to swap cars every once in a while. Or maybe one kid needs to go one place, the other needs to go somewhere else (but then I'd say that leg space wouldn't be an issue since you'd only have 1 kid in the car). I'm also in this camp myself as we'll be having another kid soon. There are plenty of options for vehicles that solve this as pointed out above, even for EVs if you want to play the environmental side of it.

But then you go and say that you want to get the Tesla Model Y?

If you have the means, go for it, it is your money and its your call. But to say this is for solving the issue of leg space when needing to chauffeur the kids? Talk about overkill.

[zolotiyeruki]

When we had two little kids in car seats, they fit just fine in the back seat of our '95 Corolla.  And that was our "bigger" car--the other was a '94 Civic.  ChpBstrd and MoneyTree are totally right.  You're trying to squash a temporary, infrequent inconvenience not with your shoe or a fly swatter, but with a $67,000 gold plated sledgehammer.  You could look at alternative car seats.  You could sell the econobox and get something slightly larger.  You could just grin and bear it for the couple times per week it happens, and then forget about it in a couple years as the kids grow.  You could plan better so that the person driving the kids takes the big car.  If you're picking up kids on the way home from work in the econobox, you could put one car seat behind the front passenger seat, and the other in the rear middle seat, and maintain your driving position.

Yeah, yeah, it's your money, but don't fool yourself that trading the econobox for a Tesla is a rational, logical decision from a financial point of view.  Let's assume your econobox gets 35mpg, you drive it 10k miles/year, and gas is $4/gallon.  You'll spend about $1100/year on gas, or $0.11/mile.  Add a few cents per mile for oil and other fluid changes.  An acquaintance of mine figures his Tesla costs him $0.03/mile for electricity.  So you'd save about $1000/year on gas a maintenance.  Of course, since Teslas can only be repaired by dealers, if anything goes wrong, that equation rapidly goes the other way.  Invest the $67k in the market, and keep the econobox, and you're waaaay ahead financially.

You think that EVs will eventually take over the market.  And I'd agree with you.  But that's not a reason to buy one right now, unless you think they'll be harder to get in the future for some reason.  The environmental aspect doesn't seem to be sufficient on its own to justify trading in the econobox.

This really feels like TDES: Tiny Details Exaggeration Syndrome.  You're looking at spending enormous quantities of money in order to remove a minor, sporadic, and temporary inconvenience from your life.

[Goanywhere]

I should have clarified at the beginning that our children are still very young so the car seats need to be rear facing. However, you are all spot on, this is more of a luxury to solve an inconvenience rather than a real need. 

Sometimes it is hard ignore temptation (especially at in this case because we get great prices on Tesla's in my country, equivalent of USD45k for a new Model Y) but and it is great to have sounding board to deliver a facepunch and get me back in line!

Thank you

[alsoknownasDean]

Would everyone fit in a lightly-used 2013 Camry?

Obviously there's also the consideration of your own financial situation. If you're basically fat-FIRE, then it's a very different proposition to if you've got a lot of card debt.

Most sensible financial decision is probably to buy a more suitable ICE unless you're driving enough that the lower running costs of the EV cover the difference.

You can buy a lot of gas with a $1000 per month car payment.

[achvfi]

I should have clarified at the beginning that our children are still very young so the car seats need to be rear facing. However, you are all spot on, this is more of a luxury to solve an inconvenience rather than a real need. 

Sometimes it is hard ignore temptation (especially at in this case because we get great prices on Tesla's in my country, equivalent of USD45k for a new Model Y) but and it is great to have sounding board to deliver a facepunch and get me back in line!

Thank you

Kudos, Good for you.

I had so many similar temptations over time that I rationalize to myself in different ways. Our minds can become echo chambers with temptations hanging on to every thread we can find.

[AccidentialMustache]

If your Tesla price is that low, I'd have to imagine that the other "less Tesla" EVs should be even cheaper. Run the numbers with your driving and time-value of money/financing and electricity vs gas and see if it'd make sense. It is possible it would.

It can be face punch worthy all day, but if it makes economic sense without lotto-ticket shenanigans like "well teslas are worth more today than 3 years ago and I made a profit" then do what makes economic sense. Sometimes incentives are weird.

[bryan995]

Yes why is the model Y only $45k USD for you ?
Broadly available incentives? Or tesla specific?

Folks here often focus solely on absolute numbers. Large absolute numbers being particularly scary.

If there is some game to be played where you can buy low with incentives and then sell high later, then this needs to be considered for your total-cost-of-ownership (TCO).
You can then compare to other non EV/Tesla vehicles that fit your needs and have a true apples/apples ranking.
IMO - All that matters is the TCO over X years. Not the initial purchase price.

And do allow yourself to have some fun relative to your income/savings (assuming you enjoy tech/cars!).

[joemandadman189]

I think we are mixing face punches with the question, how is the mustache brain trust managing the need for a car that can haul kids that is electrified vs a more economical ICE car that can do the same things at a cheaper price but higher carbon footprint

in my mind its an ethical question about how best to manage your carbon footprint and a financial question on balancing the extra cost of an EV - similar to solar panels, i know they are a good idea and social benefit for me and the world but they still cost money that i have to spend.

this is something i am looking at now and would love a Ford F-150 lightning or a PHEV Jeep but may end up with a bolt EUV or a hybrid honda accord

[Goanywhere]

Thanks again all. 

The rebate arrangement here is capped at EVs costing less than the local currency equivalent of USD51k. The reason the Tesla is so attractive is that their pricing has been set precisely so that the model 3/Y is eligible for the rebate.  I’m not sure how long that’ll last.  This actually means other cheaper EVs are more expensive relative to the Tesla because the manufacturer doesn’t have to reduce the headline price to be eligible for the rebate.  . 

The point however remains, I’ll run the numbers and see if it makes financial sense to upgrade.  That is a hard calculation not knowing what disposal value a Tesla will have in say 10-15 years. 

Further context is we are getting close to our FIRE goal.  We are at about 20x expense currently but have an 80% saving rate so closing in on the magic 25x shortly. We are likely to continue working a bit longer to provide more cushion and also fund some overseas travel etc

[CurledMoss]

Much of our electricity comes from coal. Even the renewable sources take many many years to even become carbon neutral. Plus making the battery. Plus the batteries can have issues and can't be repaired. Then you need another battery. Have they figured out recycling batteries yet? Buying a used ICE would be reusing. Buying a new car would be replacing. I question your guilt

[RWD]

Have they figured out recycling batteries yet?

Lithium battery recycling/reuse has been going on for quite some time now and it's only getting better
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/recycled-lithium-ion-batteries-can-perform-better-than-new-ones/

[Abe]

Much of our electricity comes from coal. Even the renewable sources take many many years to even become carbon neutral. Plus making the battery. Plus the batteries can have issues and can't be repaired. Then you need another battery. Have they figured out recycling batteries yet? Buying a used ICE would be reusing. Buying a new car would be replacing. I question your guilt

1. In the US, at least, many states have little to no coal plants at this point. Even using Kentucky, which does get >50% from coal, an EV produces less emissions.  https://www.nei.org/resources/statistics/state-electricity-generation-fuel-shares
https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/electric-vehicle-myths#Myth1
https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=bt2 to calculate emissions

2. Using data for European cars (which are generally more efficient than ones in the US, and estimates for CO2 production from battery materials/construction, most EVs come out ahead than even the most efficient gas/diesel cars). This is assuming no battery recycling, and a lifespan of 150,000 km (93,000 mile). Figure 1 in:
https://theicct.org/sites/default/files/publications/EV-life-cycle-GHG_ICCT-Briefing_09022018_vF.pdf

3. Most car batteries are modular and individual parts can be repaired. Also, same can happen for engines (which are more likely to break as they have more moving parts operating at high temperature/pressures).

4. As others note, battery recycling is coming online (though it remains relatively expensive). In addition, just using the battery for a less stressful job such as stationary backup is probably better at this point - and is being done already.

I do agree that used gas car versus new EV is worth considering, since some fraction of the gas cars' usable lifespan remains. Best case is buying a used EV, then!

[mistymoney]

Re-using an ICE car (I.e buying used) is more environmentally friendly than causing a new EV to be born.

why? because the ICE car is junked and not passed on to another owner or something?

[Paper Chaser]

Re-using an ICE car (I.e buying used) is more environmentally friendly than causing a new EV to be born.

why? because the ICE car is junked and not passed on to another owner or something?

Because manufacturing things, especially EVs has a pretty sizeable environmental impact. EVs are clean enough to overcome that detrimental start as miles are added (thanks to zero tailpipe emissions and reduced GHGs), but it takes awhile. The exact mileage depends on a bunch of factors, but most estimates that I've seen were around 30k-50k miles of use when the EV would reach the break even point where it offset the GHG emissions from it's own manufacturing.

A used ICE has already made it's impact from production, so the only detrimental impact that it has comes in the form of GHG and tailpipe emissions on a per mile basis. So the new EV has a ton of ground to make up compared to a used ICE when it comes to breaking even from a carbon footprint standpoint. For a mustachian person that may drive very little, the EV may never be more beneficial than an efficient used ICE.

[CurledMoss]

Much of our electricity comes from coal. Even the renewable sources take many many years to even become carbon neutral. Plus making the battery. Plus the batteries can have issues and can't be repaired. Then you need another battery. Have they figured out recycling batteries yet? Buying a used ICE would be reusing. Buying a new car would be replacing. I question your guilt

1. In the US, at least, many states have little to no coal plants at this point. Even using Kentucky, which does get >50% from coal, an EV produces less emissions.  https://www.nei.org/resources/statistics/state-electricity-generation-fuel-shares
https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/electric-vehicle-myths#Myth1
https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=bt2 to calculate emissions

2. Using data for European cars (which are generally more efficient than ones in the US, and estimates for CO2 production from battery materials/construction, most EVs come out ahead than even the most efficient gas/diesel cars). This is assuming no battery recycling, and a lifespan of 150,000 km (93,000 mile). Figure 1 in:
https://theicct.org/sites/default/files/publications/EV-life-cycle-GHG_ICCT-Briefing_09022018_vF.pdf

3. Most car batteries are modular and individual parts can be repaired. Also, same can happen for engines (which are more likely to break as they have more moving parts operating at high temperature/pressures).

4. As others note, battery recycling is coming online (though it remains relatively expensive). In addition, just using the battery for a less stressful job such as stationary backup is probably better at this point - and is being done already.

I do agree that used gas car versus new EV is worth considering, since some fraction of the gas cars' usable lifespan remains. Best case is buying a used EV, then!

I see a lot of false information here. Like when  ICE car breaks down you can go to autozone and buy the part and replace yourself... If electric car breaks down you better pray it's under warranty lol. If it's a battery issue get ready for a car loan because it's a throw away item. I've seen it happen tesla owners. An ICE engine can be fixed.  My car was 15k brand new and gets 40mpg on E50 (50% newable resource) to fill up for CHEAP. In our winters electric cars lose up to 50% of their mpg due to wind and cold. ICE only 20%.

Talking about recycling is not the same thing as doing

What happens on cloudy days no wind? Oh yeah. Nuclear, coal, natural gas. If 20% of the population went electric car in the next year where is that electric going to come from?

Different grades of coal produce different amounts of emissions.

Our cars get worse mpg than EU because they are lower compression here. Ours are designed to run on 87 octane. Theirs 93 or so. My E50 is closer to 100 octane. Imagine the efficiency I could get on my car if was actually designed to take advantage of the fuel. We could make ICE cars more efficient or at least the option when purchasing.

If OP wants to something to feel guilty about you could say having kids. Just imagine that carbon footprint ;)

[JLee]

Much of our electricity comes from coal. Even the renewable sources take many many years to even become carbon neutral. Plus making the battery. Plus the batteries can have issues and can't be repaired. Then you need another battery. Have they figured out recycling batteries yet? Buying a used ICE would be reusing. Buying a new car would be replacing. I question your guilt

1. In the US, at least, many states have little to no coal plants at this point. Even using Kentucky, which does get >50% from coal, an EV produces less emissions.  https://www.nei.org/resources/statistics/state-electricity-generation-fuel-shares
https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/electric-vehicle-myths#Myth1
https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=bt2 to calculate emissions

2. Using data for European cars (which are generally more efficient than ones in the US, and estimates for CO2 production from battery materials/construction, most EVs come out ahead than even the most efficient gas/diesel cars). This is assuming no battery recycling, and a lifespan of 150,000 km (93,000 mile). Figure 1 in:
https://theicct.org/sites/default/files/publications/EV-life-cycle-GHG_ICCT-Briefing_09022018_vF.pdf

3. Most car batteries are modular and individual parts can be repaired. Also, same can happen for engines (which are more likely to break as they have more moving parts operating at high temperature/pressures).

4. As others note, battery recycling is coming online (though it remains relatively expensive). In addition, just using the battery for a less stressful job such as stationary backup is probably better at this point - and is being done already.

I do agree that used gas car versus new EV is worth considering, since some fraction of the gas cars' usable lifespan remains. Best case is buying a used EV, then!

I see a lot of false information here. Like when  ICE car breaks down you can go to autozone and buy the part and replace yourself... If electric car breaks down you better pray it's under warranty lol. If it's a battery issue get ready for a car loan because it's a throw away item. I've seen it happen tesla owners. An ICE engine can be fixed.  My car was 15k brand new and gets 40mpg on E50 (50% newable resource) to fill up for CHEAP. In our winters electric cars lose up to 50% of their mpg due to wind and cold. ICE only 20%.

Talking about recycling is not the same thing as doing

What happens on cloudy days no wind? Oh yeah. Nuclear, coal, natural gas. If 20% of the population went electric car in the next year where is that electric going to come from?

Different grades of coal produce different amounts of emissions.

Our cars get worse mpg than EU because they are lower compression here. Ours are designed to run on 87 octane. Theirs 93 or so. My E50 is closer to 100 octane. Imagine the efficiency I could get on my car if was actually designed to take advantage of the fuel. We could make ICE cars more efficient or at least the option when purchasing.

If OP wants to something to feel guilty about you could say having kids. Just imagine that carbon footprint ;)

That is simply not true.
https://grubermotors.com/services/model-s-main-battery-pack-repair/
https://electrek.co/2021/09/13/tesla-battery-pack-replacement-repair/

20% of the population is not going to go electric in the next year because there simply aren't enough to go around.  The argument of "but where will the power come from" is like a horse owner saying "But when everybody has a Model T, there's not enough gasoline!"

[nereo]

I see a lot of false information here.

Starting with this post, which is filled with false assumptions and intentionally misleading 'facts'

ICE car breaks down you can go to autozone and buy the part and replace yourself... If electric car breaks down you better pray it's under warranty lol. If it's a battery issue get ready for a car loan because it's a throw away item. I've seen it happen tesla owners. An ICE engine can be fixed. 

The lower maintenance and repair history of EVs relative to ICE vehicles is fairly well established at this point.  The comment about the car being a 'throwaway item" is nonsense. Yes, there are extreme outliers, but I can also point to countless cases where ICE vehicles caught on fire or the engine block cracked within a year of coming off warranty.  Some models had such widespread issues they lost class-action lawsuits.

My car was 15k brand new and gets 40mpg on E50 (50% newable resource) to fill up for CHEAP.

Your car cost 15k when?
40mpg at current petrol prices won't come close to matching the efficiency of most EVs.  At median residential electricity prices most EVs cost less per mile than your vehicle whenever gasoline prices are above $2/gal.  This of course only improves if you get some or all of your recharging at lower rates.

What happens on cloudy days no wind? Oh yeah. Nuclear, coal, natural gas. If 20% of the population went electric car in the next year where is that electric going to come from?

Different grades of coal produce different amounts of emissions.

The local electricity portfolio absolutely matters, but excepting locations where nearly the entirely of electricity is being generated by coal (pretty much unheard of in the US) then the emissions from the grid pale in comparison to those from gasoline.  The reason is basic efficiency - even the most fuel efficient ICE vehicles aren't terribly efficient. A Toyota Prius hits about 39% efficiency (which is to say that the majority of the fuel isn't converted to mechanical energy.  While EVs certainly aren't 100% efficient they are much, much better.  Electrical to mechanical conversion runs over 85%, and the overall efficiency (taking into account transmission loss and the inefficiency at the point of production) puts most EV scenarios around 70%.
You've also conveniently left out hydro, the growing grid-level energy storage, the continuing greening of our energy portfolio and the reality that "when its cloudy and the wind doesn't blow" is a fairly small percentage of days.

Our cars get worse mpg than EU because they are lower compression here. Ours are designed to run on 87 octane. Theirs 93 or so. My E50 is closer to 100 octane. Imagine the efficiency I could get on my car if was actually designed to take advantage of the fuel. We could make ICE cars more efficient or at least the option when purchasing.

Not sure what point you are trying to make here.  We certainly could have much better fuel efficiency standards here in the US, including on vehicles we've decided to classify as "light trucks" (which represent the largest market share of residential vehicles).  I've argued for and most here would support much better standards. But the bottom line is even these more efficient vehicles will have a much greater lifecycle emissions than today's EVs, for reasons outlined above.

[AccidentialMustache]

My car was 15k brand new and gets 40mpg on E50 (50% newable resource) to fill up for CHEAP. In our winters electric cars lose up to 50% of their mpg due to wind and cold. ICE only 20%.

Ethanol isn't great. https://www.vox.com/2016/2/22/11075200/ethanol-carbon-footprint -- "Better than oil" is a low bar to clear.

Also, all the good about "the reduction in cabron intensity for the Ethanol we use" sounds great until you think about, "is that essentially destroying the ground for future generations?"

Signed,
Someone Who Used To Work In Ag Tech

[nereo]

My car was 15k brand new and gets 40mpg on E50 (50% newable resource) to fill up for CHEAP. In our winters electric cars lose up to 50% of their mpg due to wind and cold. ICE only 20%.

Ethanol isn't great. https://www.vox.com/2016/2/22/11075200/ethanol-carbon-footprint -- "Better than oil" is a low bar to clear.

Also, all the good about "the reduction in cabron intensity for the Ethanol we use" sounds great until you think about, "is that essentially destroying the ground for future generations?"

Signed,
Someone Who Used To Work In Ag Tech

There’s a lot about those ethanol statements which require further scrutiny.  The energy density of ethanol is much less than of gasoline 25MJ/kg vs 47 MJ/kg). Replacing some of your gasoline with ethanol will always decrease mpg.  Going to E50 will drop fuel efficiency by about 24%

Then there’s the Ag and distribution issues described above. Some aspects could be improved with better adaptation, others (like the impact and quantity of domestic land required to replace ~10MM barrels of oil daily)

[Abe]

Tesla has suffered from non-drivetrain issues (first panels not lining up well, then some issues with heat pumped?) but the electric drivetrain and the batteries in particular are quite reliable per consumers’ review.