How much does it cost to charge an electric vehicle? Here's what you can expect.


ev charging

CSA Z462 Arc Flash Training - Electrical Safety Essentials

Our customized live online or in‑person group training can be delivered to your staff at your location.

  • Live Online
  • 6 hours Instructor-led
  • Group Training Available
Regular Price:
$249
Coupon Price:
$199
Reserve Your Seat Today

Electric Vehicle Charging Costs and Times explain kWh usage, electricity rates, Level 2 vs DC fast charging, per-mile expense, and tax credits, with examples by region and battery size to estimate home and public charging.

 

Key Points

They measure EV charging price and duration based on kWh rates, charger level, efficiency, and location.

✅ Costs vary by kWh price, region, and charger type.

✅ Efficiency (mi/kWh) sets per-mile cost and range.

✅ Tax credits and utility rates impact total ownership.

 

More and more car manufacturing companies dip their toes in the world of electric vehicles every year, making it a good time to buy an EV for many shoppers, and the U.S. government is also offering incentives to turn the tides on car purchasing. Electric vehicles bought between 2010 and 2022 may be eligible for a tax credit of up to $7,500. 

And according to the Consumer Reports analysis on long-term ownership, the cost of charging an electric vehicle is almost always cheaper than fueling a gas-powered car – sometimes by hundreds of dollars.

But that depends on the type of car and where in the country you live, in a market many expect to be mainstream within a decade across the U.S. Here's everything you need to know.


How much does it cost to charge an electric car?
An electric vehicle’s fuel efficiency can be measured in kilowatt-hours per 100 miles, and common charging-efficiency myths have been fact-checked to correct math errors.

For example, if electricity costs 10.7 cents per kilowatt-hour, charging a 200-mile range 54-kWh battery would cost about $6. Charging a vehicle that consumes 27 kWh to travel 100 miles would cost three cents a mile. 

The national average cost of electricity is 10 cents per kWh and 11.7 cents per kWh for residential use. Idaho National Laboratory’s Advanced Vehicle Testing compares the energy cost per mile for electric-powered and gasoline-fueled vehicles.

For example, at 10 cents per kWh, an electric vehicle with an efficiency of 3 miles per kWh would cost about 3.3 cents per mile. The gasoline equivalent cost for this electricity cost would be just under $2.60 per gallon.

Prices vary by location as well. For example, Consumer Report found that West Coast electric vehicles tend to be less expensive to operate than gas-powered or hybrid cars, and are often better for the planet depending on local energy mix, but gas prices are often lower than electricity in New England.

Public charging networks in California cost about 30 cents per kWh for Level 2 and 40 cents per kWh for DCFC. Here’s an example of the cost breakdown using a Nissan LEAF with a 150-mile range and 40-kWh battery:

Level 2, empty to full charge: $12
DCFC, empty to full charge: $16

Many cars also offer complimentary charging for the first few years of ownership or provide credits to use for free charging. You can check the full estimated cost using the Department of Energy’s Vehicle Cost Calculator as the grid prepares for an American EV boom in the years ahead.


How long does it take to charge an electric car?
This depends on the type of charger you're using. Charging with a Level 1 charger takes much longer to reach full battery than a level 2 charger or a DCFC, or Direct Current Fast Charger. Here's how much time you can expect to spend charging your electric vehicle:

Related News

Solar Power Becomes EU’s Top Electricity Source

Solar has become the EU’s main source of electricity, marking a historic turning point in Europe’s energy mix as solar power surpasses nuclear and wind, accelerates renewable expansion, lowers carbon emissions, and strengthens the EU’s clean energy transition.

 

Why has Solar Become the EU’s Main Source of Electricity?

Solar has become the EU’s primary source of electricity due to rapid solar expansion, lower installation costs, and robust clean energy policies, which have boosted generation, reduced fossil fuel dependence, and accelerated Europe’s transition toward sustainability.

✅ Surging solar capacity and falling costs

✅ Policy support for renewable energy growth

✅ Reduced reliance on oil, gas, and coal

 

For the first time in history, solar energy became the leading source of electricity generation in the European Union in June 2025, marking a major milestone in the continent’s transition toward renewable energy, as renewables surpassed fossil fuels across the bloc this year. According to new data from Eurostat, more than half of the EU's net electricity production in the second quarter of the year came from renewable sources, with solar power leading the way.

Between April and June 2025, renewables accounted for 54 percent of the EU’s electricity generation, a 1.3 percent increase compared to the same period in 2024. The rise was driven primarily by solar energy, with countries like Germany seeing a solar boost amid the energy crisis, which generated 122,317 gigawatt-hours (GWh) in the second quarter—enough, in theory, to power around three million homes.

Rob Stait, a spokesperson for Alight, one of Europe’s leading solar developers, described the achievement as “heartening.” He said, “Solar’s boom is because it can generate huge energy cost savings, and it's easy and quick to install and scale. A solar farm can be developed in a year, compared to at least five years for wind and at least ten for nuclear. But most importantly, it provides clean, renewable power, and its increased adoption drastically reduces the reliance of Europe on Russian oil and gas supplies.”

Eurostat’s data shows that June 2025 was the first month ever when solar overtook all other energy sources, accounting for 22 percent of the EU’s energy mix, reflecting a broader renewables surge across the region. Nuclear power followed closely at 21.6 percent, wind at 15.8 percent, hydro at 14.1 percent, and natural gas at 13.8 percent.

The shift comes at a critical time as Europe continues to navigate the economic and energy challenges brought on by Russia’s ongoing war in Ukraine. With fossil fuel markets remaining volatile, countries have increasingly viewed investment in renewables as both an environmental and strategic imperative. As Stait noted, energy resilience and renewable infrastructure have now become a “strategic necessity.”

Denmark led the EU in renewable energy generation during the second quarter, producing 94.7% of its electricity from renewable sources. It was followed by Latvia (93.4%), Austria (91.8%), Croatia (89.5%), and Portugal (85.6%). Luxembourg recorded the largest year-on-year increase, up 13.5 percent, largely due to a surge in solar production. Belgium also saw strong growth, with a 9.1 percent rise in renewable generation compared to 2024, while Ireland targets over one-third green electricity within four years.

At the other end of the spectrum, Slovakia, Malta, and the Czech Republic lagged behind, producing just 19.9%, 21.2%, and 22.1% of their electricity from renewable sources, respectively.

Stait believes the continued expansion of renewables will help stabilize and eventually lower electricity prices across Europe. “The accelerated buildout of renewables will ultimately lower bills for both businesses and other users—but slower buildouts mean sky-high prices may linger,” he said.

He added a call for decisive action: “My advice to European nations would be to keep going further and faster. There needs to be political action to solve grid congestion, and to create opportunities for innovation and manufacturing in Europe will be critical to keep momentum.”

With solar energy now taking the lead for the first time, Europe’s clean energy transformation appears to be entering a new phase, as global renewables set new records and momentum builds—one that combines environmental sustainability with energy security and economic opportunity.

 

Related Articles

View more

Translation: Wind energy at sea in Europe

Nature-friendly offshore wind energy supports climate neutrality by reducing greenhouse gases while safeguarding marine biodiversity through EU marine spatial planning, ecosystem-based approaches, cross-border coordination, and zero-use zones for resilient seas.

 

Key Points

An approach to offshore wind that cuts emissions while respecting ecological limits and protecting marine biodiversity.

✅ Aligns buildout with ecological limits and marine spatial plans

✅ Minimizes noise, collision, and habitat loss for sensitive species

✅ Coordinates EU-wide monitoring, data, and cross-border siting

 

Offshore wind power can help reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but it poses risks for the seas. Germany will hold the EU Council Presidency and the North Sea Energy Cooperation Presidency in 2020. What must be done to contain the climate and species crises, as it were?

Offshore wind power is an important regenerative energy source with a $1 trillion market outlook in the coming decades. However, the construction, operation and maintenance of the systems put marine mammals, birds and fish at considerable risk. Photo: Siemens AG

In order to achieve the German and EU climate and energy goals by 2030 and climate neutrality by 2050, we need a nature-friendly energy transition. At present, the European energy system is largely based on fossil fuels. This is changing, as renewables surge across Europe for end consumers and industry and the large-scale electrification of the energy consumption sectors. Offshore wind energy is an element for future power generation.

A nature-friendly energy transition is only possible if energy consumption is reduced and energy efficiency is maximized in all applications and sectors. Emissions reductions through offshore wind energy In 2019, Europe had an installed offshore wind energy capacity of around 22 gigawatts from 5,047 grid-connected wind turbines in twelve countries. In Germany, the nominal output of the offshore wind turbines feeding into the German power grid was around 7.5 gigawatts, with clean energy accounting for about 50% of electricity nationwide. The wind blows much stronger and more steadily at sea than on land.

The power capacity of the turbines has also almost doubled in the last five years, which has led to a higher energy yield. Offshore wind energy is a building block for replacing fossil fuels, and markets like the U.S. offshore sector are about to soar as well. Wind turbines at sea provide electricity almost every hour of the year and have operating hours that are as high as conventional power plants. They can contribute to significant reductions in CO2 emissions and to mitigate the climate crisis.

It must be ensured that offshore wind turbines and parks as well as the grid infrastructure make a positive contribution to climate protection through their expansion and that the overall condition of marine ecosystems improves. The expansion of offshore wind energy is necessary from the point of view of climate science and must take place within the framework of the ecological load limits and under nature conservation aspects.

Seas and marine ecosystems suffer from years of overfishing, pollution and industrial use. The conservation status of sea birds, marine mammals and fish stocks is poor. Ecosystem services and productivity of the oceans are decreasing as a result of massive species extinction and unfavorable habitats. Changes in sea temperature, oxygen levels and acidification of the oceans reduce their resilience to the climate crisis.

The latest reports from the European Environment Agency show in black and white that the good environmental status and other goals of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive are not being achieved. The primary goal must therefore be to meet the obligations of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive and the EU nature conservation directives.

With the expansion of offshore wind energy, the pressure on the already polluted marine ecosystems is increasing. Offshore wind turbines also harbor risks for marine ecosystems, especially if they are built in unfavorable locations. Studies show harmful effects on marine mammals, birds, fish and the ocean floor. In Europe, where wind power investments hit $29.4 billion last year, a regulatory framework must be created for the expansion of offshore wind energy within the ecological limits and taking into account zero-use zones. The European Union urgently needs to take coherent measures for healthy and resilient seas.

New strategy of the European Commission The EU Commission plans to present a strategy for the expansion of renewable energies at sea on November 18, 2020.

The strategy will address the opportunities and challenges associated with the expansion of renewable energies at sea, such as effects on energy networks and markets, management of the maritime space, the technological transfer of research projects, regional and international cooperation and industrial policy dimensions, as well as political headwinds in some countries that can affect project pipelines. NABU welcomes the strategy, but worries about insufficient consideration of marine protection, ecological load-bearing capacity and the marine spatial planning that regulates interests in the use of the sea. All EU member states have to submit their marine spatial planning plans by March 2021.

Conclusions of the European Council Shortly before the end of 2020, the European Council plans to adopt conclusions for cooperation among European member states on the subject of offshore wind energy and other renewable energy sources at sea. It is important that the planning and development of offshore wind energy is coordinated across national borders, including alignment with the UK's offshore wind growth, also to protect marine ecosystems.

However, the ecosystem approach must not be left out. It must be ensured that the Council conclusions focus on the implementation of EU marine and nature conservation directives for the expansion of offshore wind energy within the load limits. EU-wide monitoring systems can help protect marine species and ecosystems. Germany holds the EU Council Presidency and the North Sea Energy Cooperation Presidency for 2020 and can make a decisive contribution.

NABU demands on offshore wind energy in Europe Expansion targets for offshore wind energy across Europe should be based on the ecological load limits of the seas. Development of concrete concepts for the ecological upgrading of areas in marine spatial planning and operationalization of the ecosystem-based approach.

For the nature-friendly expansion of offshore – Wind energy systems must take into account avoidance distances from seabirds to turbines, habitat loss, collision risks and cumulative effects. Implementation / obligation to sensitivity analyzes – they allow targeted conclusions about the best possible locations for offshore wind energy without conflicts with marine protection.

Targeted keeping of areas free for species and their Habitats of anthropogenic use – this increases planning security and can lower investment thresholds for EU funding programs. Ensuring regional cooperation between the European member states for nature Protection and with the involvement of nature conservation authorities – after all, the marine ecosystem does not stop at borders.

Adjustment of priorities: If offshore wind energy is prioritized over other renewable energy sources across Europe, other industrial forms of use of the seas must be given a lower priority.

 

Related News

View more

California looks to electric vehicles for grid stability

California EV V2G explores bi-directional charging, smart charging, and demand response to enhance grid reliability. CPUC, PG&E, and automakers test incentives aligning charging with solar and wind, helping prevent blackouts and curtailment.

 

Key Points

California EV V2G uses two-way charging and smart incentives to support grid reliability during peak demand.

✅ CPUC studies feasibility, timelines, and cost barriers to V2G

✅ Incentives shift charging to align with solar, wind, off-peak hours

✅ High-cost bidirectional chargers and warranties remain hurdles

 

California energy regulators are eyeing the power stored in electric vehicles as they hunt for ways to avoid blackouts caused by extreme weather.

While few EV and their charging ports are equipped to deliver electricity back into the grid during emergencies, the California Public Utilities Commission wants more data on it as the agency rules on steps utilities must take to ensure they have enough power for this summer and next year. A draft CPUC decision due to be discussed this week asks about the feasibility of reversing the charge when needed (Energywire, March 8).

“Very few [EVs], maybe a couple of thousand at the most, can give power to the grid, and even fewer are connected into a charger that can do it,” said Gil Tal, director of the Plug-in Hybrid & Electric Vehicle Research Center at the University of California, Davis. EVs that feature the ability “have it at a more experimental level.”

The issue arises as California, where about half of all U.S. EVs are purchased, examines what role the vehicles can play in keeping lights on and refrigerators running and how a much bigger grid will support them in the long term. Even if grid operators can’t pull from EV batteries en masse, experts say cash and other incentives can prompt drivers to shift charging times, boosting grid stability.

“What we can do is not charge the electric cars at times of high demand” such as during heat waves, Tal said.

The EV focus comes after California’s grid manager last summer imposed rolling blackouts when power supplies ran short during a record-shattering heat wave. State energy regulators across the U.S., as EVs challenge state grids, are also looking at their disaster preparedness as Texas recovers from a winter storm last month that cut off electricity for more than 4 million homes and businesses there.

California’s EV efforts can help other states as they add more renewable power to their grids, said Adam Langton, energy services manager at BMW of North America.

That automaker ran a pilot program with San Francisco-based utility Pacific Gas & Electric Co. (PG&E) looking at whether money and other incentives could prompt EV drivers to charge their cars at different times. The payments successfully shifted charging to the middle of the night, when wind power often is plentiful. It also moved some repowering to mornings and early afternoons, when there’s abundant solar energy.

“That can be a tool that the utilities can use to deal with supply issues,” Langton said. “What our research has shown is that vehicles can contribute to [conservation] needs and emergency supply by shifting their charging time.”

Such measures can also help states avoid having to curtail solar production on days when there’s more generation than needed. On many bright days, California has more solar power than it can use.

“As more states add more renewable energy, we think that they’re going to find that EVs complement that really well with smart charging, because grid coordination can get that charging to align with the renewable energy,” Langton said. “It allows to add more and more renewable energy.”

High-cost equipment a hurdle
The CPUC at a future workshop plans to collect information on leveraging EVs to head off power shortages at key times.

But Tal said it will probably take a decade to get enough EVs capable of exporting electricity back to utilities “in high numbers that can make an impact on the grid.”

Barriers to reaching such “vehicle to grid” integration are technical and economic, he said. EVs export direct current and need a device on the other side that can convert it to alternating current, similar to a solar power inverter for rooftop panels.

However, the equipment known as a V2G capable charger is costly. It ranges from $4,500 to $5,500, according to a 2017 National Renewable Energy Laboratory report.

PG&E and Los Angeles-based Southern California Edison already have “expressed doubt that short-term measures could be developed in time to expand EV participation by summer 2021” in V2G programs, the draft CPUC proposal said. The utilities suggested instead that the agency encourage EV owners to participate in initiatives where they’d get paid for reducing power consumption or sell electricity back to the grid when needed, known as demand response programs.

Still, almost all major EV automakers are looking at two-directional charging, Tal said.

“The incentive is you can get more value for the car,” he said. “The disincentive is you add more miles in a way on the car,” because an owner would be discharging to the grid and re-charging, and “the battery has limited life.”

And right now, discharging a vehicle to the grid would violate many warranties, he said. Car manufacturers would need to agree to change that and could call for compensation in return.

Meanwhile, San Diego Gas & Electric Co., a Sempra Energy subsidy, plans to launch a pilot looking at delivering power to the grid from electric school buses. The six buses in the pilot transport students in El Cajon, Calif., east of San Diego.

“The buses are perfect because of their big batteries and predictable schedule,” Jessica Packard, SDG&E spokesperson, said in an email. “Ultimately, we hope to scale up and deploy these kinds of innovations throughout our grid in the future.”

She declined to say how much power the buses could deliver because the project isn’t yet operating. It’s set to start later this year.

Mobility needs
While BMW and PG&E did not review vehicle-to-grid power transfers in their own 2017 research ending last year, one study in Delaware did. But it was in a university setting about eight years ago and didn’t look at actual drivers, said Langton with BMW.

In their own findings from the San Francisco Bay Area pilot program, BMW and PG&E found that incentives could quickly change driver behavior in terms of charging.

Technology helps: Most new EVs have timers that allow the driver to control when to charge and when to stop charging. Langton said the pilot program got drivers to have their cars charge from roughly 2 to 6 a.m., when electricity rates typically are lowest.

There can be a lot of solar energy during the day, but in summer, optimum charging times get more complicated in California, he said. People want to run their air conditioners during peak heat hours, so it’s important to be able to get EV drivers to shift to less congested times, he said.

With the right incentives or messaging, Langton said, the pilot persuaded drivers to move charging from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. or noon to 4 p.m. BMW technology allowed for detailed information on battery charge level, ideal charging times and other EV data to be transmitted electronically after plugging in.

The findings are a good first step toward future vehicle-to-grid integration, Langton added.

“One of the things we really pay attention to when we do smart charging is, ‘How does the driver’s mobility needs figure into shifting their charging?'” he said. “We want to make sure that our customers can always do the driving that they need to do.”

The pilot included safeguards such as an opt-out button if the driver wanted to charge immediately. It also made sure the vehicle had a certain level of minimum charge — 15% to 20% — before the delayed smart charging kicked in.

Vehicle-to-grid technology would need to wrestle with the same concepts in a different way. If a car is getting discharged, the driver would want assurances its battery wouldn’t dip below a level that meets their mobility needs, Langton said.

“If that happened even once to a customer, they would probably not want to participate in these programs in the future,” he said.

One group adding charging stations across the country said it isn’t tweaking pricing based on when drivers charge. That’s to help grow EV purchases, said Robert Barrosa, senior director of sales and marketing at Volkswagen AG subsidiary Electrify America, which operates about 450 charging stations in 45 states.

The company has installed battery storage at more than 100 sites to make sure they can provide power at consistent prices even if California or another state calls for energy conservation.

“It’s very important for vehicle adoption that the customer have that,” Barrosa said.

The company could sell that battery storage back to the grid if there are shortfalls, but some market changes are needed first, particularly in California, he said. That’s because the company buys electricity on the retail side but would be sending it back into the wholesale market.

With that cost differential, Barrosa said, “it doesn’t make sense.”

 

Related News

View more

Why a green recovery goes far deeper than wind energy

Scotland Green Recovery Strategy centers on renewable energy, onshore wind, energy efficiency, battery storage, hydrogen, and electric vehicles, alongside public transport and digital infrastructure, local manufacturing, and grid flexibility to decarbonize industry and communities.

 

Key Points

A plan to cut emissions by scaling renewables, efficiency, storage, and infrastructure for resilient, low-carbon growth.

✅ Prioritize energy efficiency retrofits in homes and workplaces

✅ Invest in battery storage, hydrogen, and EV charging networks

✅ Support local manufacturing and circular economy supply chains

 

THE “green recovery” joins the growing list of Covid-era political maxims, while green energy investment could drive recovery, suggesting a bright and environmentally sustainable post-pandemic future lies ahead.

The Prime Minister once again alluded to it recently when he expressed his ambition to see the UK become the “world leader in clean wind energy”. In his typically bombastic style, Boris Johnson declared that everything from our kettles to electric vehicles, with offshore wind energy central to that vision, will be powered by “breezes that blow around these islands” by the next decade.

These comments create a misleading impression about how we can achieve a green recovery, particularly as Covid-19 hit renewables and exposed systemic challenges. While wind turbines have a key role to play, they are just one part of a comprehensive solution requiring a far more in-depth focus on how and why we use energy. We must concentrate our efforts and resources on reducing our overall consumption and increasing energy capture.

This includes making significant energy efficiency improvements to the buildings where we live and work and grasping the lessons of lockdown, including proposals for a fossil fuel lockdown to accelerate climate action, to ensure we operate in a more effective and less environmentally-damaging fashion. Do we really want to return to a world where people commute daily half way across the country for work or fly to New York for a two-hour meeting?

Businesses will need to adapt to new ways of operating outwith the traditional nine-to-five working week to reduce congestion and pollution levels. To make this possible requires Government investment in critical areas such as public transport and digital infrastructure, alongside more pylons to strengthen the grid, across all parts of Scotland to decentralise the economy and enable more people to live and work outside the main cities.

A Government-supported green recovery must rest on making it financially viable for businesses to manufacture here to reduce our reliance on imported goods. This includes processing recycleable materials here rather than shipping them abroad. It also means using locally generated energy to support local jobs and industry. We miss a trick if Scotland simply becomes a power generator for the rest of the UK.

MOVING transport from fossil fuels to renewable fuels will require a step-change that also requires support across all levels. The increased use of electric vehicles and hydrogen fuel cells are all encouraging developments, but these will rely on investment in infrastructure throughout the country if we’re to achieve significant benefits to our environment and our economy.

This brings us to the role of onshore wind power; still the cheapest form of renewable energy, and a sector marked by wind growth despite Covid-19 around the world today. Repowering existing sites with newer and more efficient turbines will certainly increase capacity rapidly, but we must also invest into development projects that will further enhance the capacity and efficiency of existing equipment. This includes improving on the current practice of the National Grid paying operators to switch off wind turbines when excess electricity is produced and instead developing new and innovative means to capture this energy. Government-primed investment into battery storage could help ensure we achieve and further reduce our reliance on traditional, non-sustainable sources.

We need a level playing field so that all forms of energy are judged on their lifetime cost in terms of emissions as well as construction and decommissioning costs to ensure fiscal incentives are applied on a fairer basis.

Turning the maxim of a green recovery into reality will require more than extra wind turbines, and the UK's wind lessons underscore the importance of policy and scale. We need a significant investment and commitment from business and government to limit existing emissions and ensure we capture and use energy more efficiently.

Andy Drane is projects partner and head of renewables at law firm Davidson Chalmers Stewart.

 

Related News

View more

Wind, solar, batteries make up 82% of 2023 utility-scale US pipeline

US Renewable Energy Capacity 2023 leads new utility-scale additions, with solar, wind, and battery storage surging; EIA data cite tax incentives, lower costs, and smart grid upgrades driving grid reliability and decarbonization.

 

Key Points

In 2023, renewables dominate new US utility-scale capacity: 54% solar, 7.1 GW wind, 8.6 GW battery storage, per EIA.

✅ 54% of 2023 US additions are solar, a record year

✅ 7.1 GW wind and 8.6 GW batteries expand grid resources

✅ Storage, smart grids, incentives boost reliability and growth

 

Wind, solar, and batteries make up 82% of 2023’s expected new utility-scale power capacity in the US, highlighting wind power's surge alongside solar and storage, according to the US Energy Information Administration’s (EIA) “Preliminary Monthly Electric Generator Inventory.”

As of January 2023, the US was operating 73.5 gigawatts (GW) of utility-scale solar capacity, which aligns with rising solar generation trends across the US – about 6% of the country’s total.

But solar makes up just over half of new US generating capacity expected to come online in 2023, supported by favourable government plans across key markets. And if it all goes as expected, it will be the most solar capacity added in a single year in the US. It will also be the first year that more than half of US capacity additions are solar, underscoring solar's No. 3 renewable ranking in the U.S. mix.

As of January 2023, 141.3 GW of wind capacity was operating in the US, reflecting wind's status as the most-used renewable nationwide – about 12% of the US total. Another 7.1 GW are planned for 2023. Tax incentives, lower wind turbine construction costs, and new renewable energy targets are spurring the growth. 

And developers also plan to add 8.6 GW of battery storage power capacity to the grid this year, supporting record solar and storage buildouts across the market, and that’s going to double total US battery power capacity.

However, differences in the amount of electricity that different types of power plants can produce mean that wind and solar made up about 17% of the US’s utility-scale capacity in 2021, but produced 12% of electricity, even as renewables surpassed coal nationally in 2022. Solutions such as energy storage, smart grids, and infrastructure development will help bridge that gap.

 

Related News

View more

Why Electric Vehicles Are "Greener" Than Ever In All 50 States

UCS EV emissions study shows electric vehicles produce lower life-cycle emissions than gasoline cars across all states, factoring tailpipe, grid mix, power plant sources, and renewable energy, delivering mpg-equivalent advantages nationwide.

 

Key Points

UCS study comparing EV and gas life-cycle emissions, finding EVs cleaner than new gas cars in every U.S. region.

✅ Average EV equals 93 mpg gas car on emissions.

✅ Cleaner than 50 mpg gas cars in 97% of U.S.

✅ Regional grid mix included: tailpipe to power plant.

 

One of the cautions cited by electric vehicle (EV) naysayers is that they merely shift emissions from the tailpipe to the local grid’s power source, implicating state power grids as a whole, and some charging efficiency claims get the math wrong, too. And while there is a kernel of truth to this notion—they’re indeed more benign to the environment in states where renewable energy resources are prevalent—the average EV is cleaner to run than the average new gasoline vehicle in all 50 states. 

That’s according to a just-released study conducted the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), which determined that global warming emissions related to EVs has fallen by 15 percent since 2018. For 97 percent of the U.S., driving an electric car is equivalent or better for the planet than a gasoline-powered model that gets 50 mpg. 

In fact, the organization says the average EV currently on the market is now on a par, environmentally, with an internal combustion vehicle that’s rated at 93 mpg. The most efficient gas-driven model sold in the U.S. gets 59 mpg, and EV sales still trail gas cars despite such comparisons, with the average new petrol-powered car at 31 mpg.

For a gasoline car, the UCS considers a vehicle’s tailpipe emissions, as well as the effects of pumping crude oil from the ground, transporting it to a refinery, creating gasoline, and transporting it to filling stations. For electric vehicles, the UCS’ environmental estimates include both emissions from the power plants themselves, along with those created by the production of coal, natural gas or other fossil fuels used to generate electricity, and they are often mischaracterized by claims about battery manufacturing emissions that don’t hold up. 

Of course the degree to which an EV ultimately affects the atmosphere still varies from one part of the country to another, depending on the local power source. In some parts of the country, driving the average new gasoline car will produce four to eight times the emissions of the average EV, a fact worth noting for those wondering if it’s the time to buy an electric car today. The UCS says the average EV driven in upstate New York produces total emissions that would be equivalent to a gasoline car that gets an impossible 255-mpg. In even the dirtiest areas for generating electricity, EVs are responsible for as much emissions as a conventionally powered car that gets over 40 mpg.

 

Related News

View more

Sign Up for Electricity Forum’s Newsletter

Stay informed with our FREE Newsletter — get the latest news, breakthrough technologies, and expert insights, delivered straight to your inbox.

Electricity Today T&D Magazine Subscribe for FREE

Stay informed with the latest T&D policies and technologies.
  • Timely insights from industry experts
  • Practical solutions T&D engineers
  • Free access to every issue

Live Online & In-person Group Training

Advantages To Instructor-Led Training – Instructor-Led Course, Customized Training, Multiple Locations, Economical, CEU Credits, Course Discounts.

Request For Quotation

Whether you would prefer Live Online or In-Person instruction, our electrical training courses can be tailored to meet your company's specific requirements and delivered to your employees in one location or at various locations.