Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Real cost of charging the Model 3?

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Yes, but don't just consider solar, do it because it's the right thing to do. If you don't use it all, just figure you're keeping some Nat gas or Oil out of the system. Then you don't have to spend hours calculating whether or not you should charge or wait for the sun to shine. No need for "complicated calculations" at all.

I should have taken the picture of the back side of my house, with 64 panels facing south by southwest. I pay PG&E about $10 a month for connection and Leck-a-Tricity. But it's not anything I worry about, whether I make a profit or not. For me, it's just right. Like spending extra to have two Teslas.

My wifey was just wondering what the life of the car is, as in Gas Cars only last a couple hundred thousand miles or so (I know, some go over that). Since I use near 25,000 a year just driving around, in the six years I've owned Tesla I've racked up 150,000 miles. If Teslas batteries live 15 years, that's pretty good life span, for a life mileage of near 400,000 miles. If they last more, good on us, matey!

I agree, i am in the process of solar install as my rates skyrocketed into tier 3 here in LADWP. I hope it will save me money in a long run and be good for environment.

Everybody will have different results, because there are many factors such as price of electricity, tiers, gas prices, commute, route, solar, free charging, free supercharging, etc. The best is when its super expensive gas, like in Europe and super cheap electricity, like solar or some states and or subsidized by local utility company and or state.

I am saving money per mile i drive, but now i just drive way more in my 2 car household, so in the end paying about the same a month but cheaper per mile.
 
The battery is a 75kW battery. Unless you’re running electricity along a 500 foot run I’m going with negligible.

He's talking about the on-board charger losses (probably 95% efficient at best) & the heat losses in the battery to charge it. These are accounted for in MPGe; it is a "wall-to-wheel" measurement (MPGe), which is different than battery to wheel (what the car displays). You can calculate this stuff yourself if you have a separately metered home charger.

ok, Alan, since you Disagreed with my post, you want to at least own it and show what is disagreeable? Perhaps post your math to show the solar payoff? (I have SCE and have run their numbers numerous times, and as a finance guy, they don't pan out unless the OP is a big user of electrons -- pool, spa, big family, et al. But in which case, OP would routinely be in Tier 3...)

I thought about responding earlier but didn't bother. I told him to "consider solar if it's possible for you" - not to just get it blindly. I told him to do the calculations for his situation.

356kWh is a lot per month. I was routinely below that in my house before getting electric vehicles. It doesn't keep the lights on, if they're incandescent. But if every single light is LED and you get rid of your vampire drains, and throw the breaker on your AC when you're not using it (they often use 40W when not being used 8 months of the year), then you can easily use a lot less than this.

Anyway, that means he's routinely in Tier 2. Let's say he's at 800kWh per month without EV (that sounded like what he was saying!) To me that is a fantastic amount of power but it is what I interpreted. A 4kW system can be had for under 10k these days, pretty easily. I think if you run these numbers I think you'll find it will pay off in less than 10 years, though it can be difficult to determine because there is regulation risk. Even if the payoff is less than 10 years, it may not make sense for him - for whatever reason!

You do have to account for the CONVENIENCE of charging at home worry free, too, that's why I recommended 8kW. He may be charging at work but it's convenient to be able to top up at home for optimal battery health and for complete flexibility - it is not hard to drive 250 miles in a weekend. Do you really want to fiddle around with it and leave your battery at 10% for 24 hours when you don't need to? That could be costly (we don't know, but Tesla recommends you leave your car plugged in and they don't allow you to charge to less than 50% without manual intervention).

I'll let you do the math, I don't really care; I have solar (not enough, even though I am not an energy hog, which is why I recommend 8kW), I am in San Diego, so the rules are different, but it has saved me money for 6 years. I had zero electricity bills for 5 years (actually, negative) (now the rules have changed and it's not as good) and last year I asked for a check for $1400 from SDG&E for my generation credits & other incentives. Still, it has not yet paid off. But it's not far off. And solar is a lot cheaper & better now than when I bought it 6 years ago. And there is "psychological" benefit.

Everyone's situation is different.

EDIT: I'll add that people don't buy Teslas ONLY to save a ton of money on fueling costs. They are luxury cars. If you wanted to save money on transportation costs (and help the environment to some extent) you'd buy a Prius. That gives you $0.06/mi with today's gas prices. A Tesla in San Diego run at a home without solar is going to run a pretty penny and is probably not going to be cheaper. Without solar, from SDG&E, you can pay $192 per year ($16/mo) to get a nighttime rate of something around 10 cents per kWh. But your rates on your AC use during the day are going to go way up from what they were with net metering. This excellent rate for an AWD Tesla is $0.034/mi (10/290). For 12k miles/yr, add $0.016/mi for the flat fee and you're at $0.05/mi.

So, if you have a nice luxurious Tesla, just make it easy for yourself to charge it without thinking about the cost, if you can. If you're in Southern California solar it is an ideal place for solar, so assuming your roof is good, and like 10 other things are good, just get it. And get a LOT to insulate yourself from rate (regulation) risk because it's annoying to spend $15k on an array and then still be paying electric bills (though it's actually probably more "optimal" to be in that situation). Also, if you have a LOT of solar, swap out your gas furnace for a heat pump when it needs to be replaced. You'll save a few hundred a year on natural gas. $15-20k for solar shouldn't be a problem if you're buying a Tesla and it will make the experience better.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Dana1
The battery is not 100% efficient, that’s why it gets hot while charging. MPGe includes that loss. It doesn’t include climate control, cabin overheat protection, vampire drain, battery heating and cooling. Real world numbers are way worse than what the car displays on the trip meter.
I should probably get a power meter for my wall connector to see exactly how much I use.
4B7DF7B9-B7F9-447B-B5A3-DF9C51D51AB7.png
 
Alan, I'm curious about your comment of a house AC system using 40w of power when off. Do you have a source for this information? I googled and only thing I could find said it was 1 watt. Thanks.

It’s a Google search which only readily works if you know the issue and put in those terms...I guess this is not a widely known issue.

I can’t comment on newer systems, but many older AC systems have a heater in the system to prevent the refrigerant from mixing with the compressor oil (or something like that - it can destroy the compressor pump).

“The function of a crankcase heater is to hold the oil in the compressor at a temperature higher than the coldest part of the system. Refrigerant entering the compressor will then be vaporized and driven back into the suction line.

However, in order to avoid overheating and carbonization of the oil, the wattage input of the crankcase heater must be limited. Also, in ambient temperatures approaching 0ÞF or when exposed suction lines and cold winds impose an added load, the crankcase heater may be overpowered and migration can still occur.

On such systems, in no event should a compressor be started unless the crankcase heater has been energized for a period of at least 12 hrs immediately prior to start-up.”

Compressor protection starts with a knowledge of refrigerant-oil basics

In any case, whatever the reason, my AC unit burns 40W all the time unless I throw the breaker. Which I do for about 8 months of the year. It’s completely outrageous (worse than Tesla vampire drain! ;) ), though there is clearly a good reason for it (just like vampire drain, amirite?). I imagine modern systems would be better, but I do not know. The link suggests there are other solutions involving sequestering the refrigerant, but I got bored reading it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Big Earl
It’s a Google search which only readily works if you know the issue and put in those terms...I guess this is not a widely known issue.

I can’t comment on newer systems, but many older AC systems have a heater in the system to prevent the refrigerant from mixing with the compressor oil (or something like that - it can destroy the compressor pump).

“The function of a crankcase heater is to hold the oil in the compressor at a temperature higher than the coldest part of the system. Refrigerant entering the compressor will then be vaporized and driven back into the suction line.

However, in order to avoid overheating and carbonization of the oil, the wattage input of the crankcase heater must be limited. Also, in ambient temperatures approaching 0ÞF or when exposed suction lines and cold winds impose an added load, the crankcase heater may be overpowered and migration can still occur.

On such systems, in no event should a compressor be started unless the crankcase heater has been energized for a period of at least 12 hrs immediately prior to start-up.”

Compressor protection starts with a knowledge of refrigerant-oil basics

In any case, whatever the reason, my AC unit burns 40W all the time unless I throw the breaker. Which I do for about 8 months of the year. It’s completely outrageous (worse than Tesla vampire drain! ;) ), though there is clearly a good reason for it (just like vampire drain, amirite?). I imagine modern systems would be better, but I do not know. The link suggests there are other solutions involving sequestering the refrigerant, but I got bored reading it.


Interesting, had no idea. I'm going to look through the manual for my system to see if it has a heater. Thanks.
 
The battery is not 100% efficient, that’s why it gets hot while charging. MPGe includes that loss. It doesn’t include climate control, cabin overheat protection, vampire drain, battery heating and cooling. Real world numbers are way worse than what the car displays on the trip meter.
I should probably get a power meter for my wall connector to see exactly how much I use.
View attachment 368002
Would you agree that an ICE vehicle experiences similar “accessory” losses? After all, the AC is run from a pulley on the engine camshaft. Lol, I’m pretty comfortable in my simple cost breakdown but I admire the freakishly detailed evaluations...don’t forget regenerative braking advantages:)
 
Would you agree that an ICE vehicle experiences similar “accessory” losses? After all, the AC is run from a pulley on the engine camshaft. Lol, I’m pretty comfortable in my simple cost breakdown but I admire the freakishly detailed evaluations...don’t forget regenerative braking advantages:)

Really getting into the weeds here...

These things exist on ICE vehicles but have much less effect on efficiency due to some of them being “bonus” (heat is “free”), and even putting that aside, if you are looking at efficiency impact as a %, they just matter a lot less. The actual energy required to run accessories is similar, it just does not have much impact on MPG (for example, AC has a similar effect on absolute additional energy/mile, except increased (significantly) by the inefficiency of an ICE engine when producing work). However, since the ICE is already using a LOT more energy, the % change is a lot less.

Another way to look at it is energy in gas is about the same price as electricity at today’s price of $3/gal (~33.7kWh energy in 1 gallon of gas so about $0.10/kWh). Fortunately, EVs use a lot less energy per mile, so usually they are cheaper to operate in terms of energy per mile. But, once you start using accessories, those (to first order - they still usually will be more efficient) cost a similar amount to operate in an EV and an ICE (and as mentioned, heat is free in an ICE). So, in an EV you could see your already very LOW costs double, while in a high-cost ICE they might only go up by 25%. But it is about the SAME absolute additional cost even though % is different. This isn’t a knock on EVs - it’s just fundamental that when you are super efficient, everything matters. It’s the reason ICE cars don’t have aero covers!

You might not notice that your fillup of your pickup cost $33 rather than the normal $30, but you would notice that your daily top up at the Supercharger cost you $6 rather than the normal $3!
 
  • Helpful
Reactions: Rocky_H
This excellent rate for an AWD Tesla is $0.034/mi (10/290). For 12k miles/yr, add $0.016/mi for the flat fee and you're at $0.05/mi.

Makes no real difference...but...
Came here to correct my terrible math (already done correctly by others at the beginning of the thread!). This is what happens when I try to track units in my head...:

$0.10/kWh * 29kWh/100mi = $0.029/mi

"This excellent rate for an AWD Tesla is $0.029/mi (10*0.290). For 12k miles/yr, add $0.016/mi for the flat fee and you're at $0.045/mi...round that to $0.05/mi."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dana1
You seriously netted 2000kWh from the grid? Here in San Diego that would cost $600 or so. I used 350kWh per month before I got my Model 3 and heat pump.

Yes, I did. It was only $200 because our rates here are 10 cents per kWh with no tiers. And we do have 2 EVs that we drive about 1500 miles per month each. My worst month this year was probably July bill:
summer sample.png


Still, only about $450 with tax (tax did not show in this picture). Good thing I have solar.
 
Living in CA and with gas prices being really low, the numbers aren't that far apart.

In most of the remainder of the country, electricity is half the price. Then wait for gas to go back to $5/g and the difference is much bigger

We may see gas prices move up over the next year or two, but as EVs starting making a presence even of just a few percent, you will see significant reductions in the price of gas everywhere. There was only a small increase in demand that drove gas prices up to $4 a gal around here (maybe $5 a gal where you are). Likewise it only took a small reduction in consumption to drop the prices back down. Once 5% of the US is driving EVs gas prices will never be high again. So it is hard to say EVs will continue to cost less to run. It won't be a fair comparison going forward. lol
 
I agree, i am in the process of solar install as my rates skyrocketed into tier 3 here in LADWP. I hope it will save me money in a long run and be good for environment.

Everybody will have different results, because there are many factors such as price of electricity, tiers, gas prices, commute, route, solar, free charging, free supercharging, etc. The best is when its super expensive gas, like in Europe and super cheap electricity, like solar or some states and or subsidized by local utility company and or state.

I am saving money per mile i drive, but now i just drive way more in my 2 car household, so in the end paying about the same a month but cheaper per mile.

If I understand correctly, by Tiers, you are referring to different pricing at different consumption totals on your monthly bill, not unlike our tax code. That seems to me to be a wrong headed way to price electricity. For one thing, who gets that excess revenue? The electric company doesn't pay higher rates for electricity on the average. They pay higher rates for electricity at peak times. Reducing your monthly bills by offsetting with solar generated energy may reduce your bills, but does little to reduce the cost to the utilities since it does little to reduce the total cost of providing generation. In fact, if the day time use of electricity drops too much, it limits the contribution of baseload providers like nuclear.

What's good for your pocketbook is not automatically good for the environment or the electrical utilities either.
 
Alan, I'm curious about your comment of a house AC system using 40w of power when off. Do you have a source for this information? I googled and only thing I could find said it was 1 watt. Thanks.

I recall a heat pump that contained relays that were activated most of the time, even when not running. I know because at least one hummed. But that would only be some 10 watts or so apiece. So if two are on all the time, that would be 20 watts. 40 watts is about 1 kWh per day or about a third of the typical vampire drain from the car itself. No?
 
My suspicion is that tiers of electricity prices are a way of implementing pseudo-TOU rates. The people using lots of total electricity are are also likely having a larger kW demand on the grid and also using more electricity during peak times. Before the advent and wide deployment of smart meters tiers were a way to approximate these other fees.
 
"Approximate"??? Sure, if there is no incentive to cut peak time usage and your use is higher in general, it is very likely your usage at peak times is higher to the same degree. But what value is that??? If I have a family of four in a larger house I will use the same amount for heating during peak times that I do any other time... which will be more than a single person in a small apartment who will use the same amount of heating during peak times than other. Both will use more at peak time when they come home from school and work.

Tiers are orthogonal to the issue and only serve to boost profits of the utility. Utilities have fixed costs which amplify profits using tiers with increasing rates at higher usage. My local utility sends a mixed message by charging less for distribution over 300 kWh a month but more for "supply" (generation and transmission) over 800 kWh per month... in the summer while a fixed rate the rest of the year.

With the recent rate change they doubled the fixed cost of distribution and added the reduced tier saying it more closely matched their expense model. I wonder why they don't go with a single TOU plan since that also would more closely match the expense model.
 
What about charging efficiency. Just because you pay for 1KWhr doesnt mean your tesla receives that. Isnt .95 a safe assumption to use. I know depending on temp, current, car, charger etc come into play but generally 95%?