EVs make good cents or sense?

David Herron torque news explained in his article "60 kWh Tesla model S at 208 mile electric driving range of EPA rated:"

"85 Kilowatt hour model S, $77.400 for 265 kilometers range, or $292 / mile of the area." The kilowatt hour 60 S model, $67.400 for 208 km range, is $324 / mile of the area. The electric cars cost much more per mile of driving range.

See this comparison the next logical step, conducted a cost analysis of EVS and petrol driven vehicles used for the carriage of passengers, to determine their comparative life-cycle costs. This analysis included 30 vehicles (2013) between a Mini Cooper and a Ferrari F12. A selection of the manufacturers of high end and low end models represented vehicles.

Only the Tesla model S all electric vehicle was considered in this study. Results can look differently with other manufacturers bottom end all electric cars.

Evaluated members include:

Motor power (HP or kWh), EPA MPG fuel economy rating or kWh 100 mile RatingFuel combined capacity (gallons).MSRP of less supply, tax, title, and LicenseRange (= combined EPA rated x fuel tank) costs per mile (EIA / area) cost over 60,000 miles of petrol [x cost of gasoline = (60,000 / MPG)]
Electricity costs more than 60,000 [(60.000 100) = X (kWh / 100 km x electricity cost)]

Total cost (= EIA + cost of fuel) cost difference by Telsa S 60 kWh (= total cost - total cost Telsa S).
The manufacturer was received by the EPO and technical specifications data for each vehicle. The cost of gasoline ($3.257 per gallon) obtained from the EIA - U.S. national average for regular grade, was 24.12.2012. The cost of electricity ($0.1187 per kWh) price obtained from the EIA - average retail retail of electricity to ultimate; rolling 12 months ending in October 2012.

Cost for routine service, tax, title, license, unplanned maintenance and costs for discharged batteries or run out of gasoline not tow the analysis included. The fact that produced electricity mainly from fossil fuels was not taken into account in this study.

It is recommended that the entire spreadsheet (.xls) see here.

The summary is as follows, from the largest to the smallest cost savings or differential of Tesla S 60 kWh at a cost of 60,000 miles:

Dodge Charger Daytona R/T plus

Ferrari F12 Berlinetta Coupe

Finally, the data for itself speaks. From a pure cost basis only Teslar make little S with 60kWh or 85kWh versions of financial sense. Acclaimed cars such as the Audi A6 and Q7, BMW and Cadillac CTS even the base Corvette are better deals.

The problem is the society requires, fossil fuels rise. With high cost EVs, which show little or even no cost savings, it is difficult to motivate consumers to buy EVs - even if it benefits us all in the long term.

EVs make good cents or sense?

David Herron torque news explained in his article "60 kWh Tesla model S at 208 mile electric driving range of EPA rated:"

"85 Kilowatt hour model S, $77.400 for 265 kilometers range, or $292 / mile of the area." The kilowatt hour 60 S model, $67.400 for 208 km range, is $324 / mile of the area. The electric cars cost much more per mile of driving range.

See this comparison the next logical step, conducted a cost analysis of EVS and petrol driven vehicles used for the carriage of passengers, to determine their comparative life-cycle costs. This analysis included 30 vehicles (2013) between a Mini Cooper and a Ferrari F12. A selection of the manufacturers of high end and low end models represented vehicles.

Only the Tesla model S all electric vehicle was considered in this study. Results can look differently with other manufacturers bottom end all electric cars.

Evaluated members include:

Motor power (HP or kWh), EPA MPG fuel economy rating or kWh 100 mile RatingFuel combined capacity (gallons).MSRP of less supply, tax, title, and LicenseRange (= combined EPA rated x fuel tank) costs per mile (EIA / area) cost over 60,000 miles of petrol [x cost of gasoline = (60,000 / MPG)]
Electricity costs more than 60,000 [(60.000 100) = X (kWh / 100 km x electricity cost)]

Total cost (= EIA + cost of fuel) cost difference by Telsa S 60 kWh (= total cost - total cost Telsa S).
The manufacturer was received by the EPO and technical specifications data for each vehicle. The cost of gasoline ($3.257 per gallon) obtained from the EIA - U.S. national average for regular grade, was 24.12.2012. The cost of electricity ($0.1187 per kWh) price obtained from the EIA - average retail retail of electricity to ultimate; rolling 12 months ending in October 2012.

Cost for routine service, tax, title, license, unplanned maintenance and costs for discharged batteries or run out of gasoline not tow the analysis included. The fact that produced electricity mainly from fossil fuels was not taken into account in this study.

It is recommended that the entire spreadsheet (.xls) see here.

The summary is as follows, from the largest to the smallest cost savings or differential of Tesla S 60 kWh at a cost of 60,000 miles:

Dodge Charger Daytona R/T plus

Ferrari F12 Berlinetta Coupe

Finally, the data for itself speaks. From a pure cost basis only Teslar make little S with 60kWh or 85kWh versions of financial sense. Acclaimed cars such as the Audi A6 and Q7, BMW and Cadillac CTS even the base Corvette are better deals.

The problem is the society requires, fossil fuels rise. With high cost EVs, which show little or even no cost savings, it is difficult to motivate consumers to buy EVs - even if it benefits us all in the long term.

The information and opinions in this blog post are solely those of the author and not necessarily the RenewableEnergyWorld.com or companies, the advertising on this Web site and other publications. This blog has been directly by the author and has not been reviewed for accuracy, spelling or grammar.

Ameresco (AMRC) Misses by 7 Cents: Look to Buy on Any Sell-off

While the headline was disappointing, President and CEO George Sakellaris confidently reaffirmed revenue guidence for the rest of the year, saying that he expected 2012 revenues to be heavily back loaded. Sakellaris predicts the second half to account for 60-62 percent of 2012 revenues, compared to 38-40 percent for the first half of the 2012.

Longer term, he expects Ameresco to continue its strong growth, with operating margin strengthening towards 20% over the longer term.

Strong revenue growth is coming from contract with the federal government. While Ameresco received only $2 million worth of awards in the whole of 2011, they have already been awarded $20 worth of contracts in 2012. Sakellaris commented that Ameresco has found it hard keeping up with federal demand so far this year.

These new contracts (up 50 percent over Q1 2011) helped grow Ameresco’s backlog by 10 percent compared to last year. While such new contracts will not begin producing revenue until 2013 at the earliest, they should give investors confidence that Ameresco’s long term growth potential is still in place. Ameresco’s revenues should continue to grow 20 percent year over year, despite the poor earnings performance this quarter.

Conclusion

This mornings’ earnings miss may cause a sell-off over the next day or two. Investors should take the opportunity to add to their positions in this sustainable company which has low exposure to expiring renewable energy subsidies.

Note: This article was first published on the author's Forbes.com blog on May 8th, and AltEnergy Stocks, when Ameresco was trading at $11.70. Click here for an up-to-date quote.

Disclosure: Long AMRC.

DISCLAIMER: Past performance is not a guarantee or a reliable indicator of future results. This article contains the current opinions of the author and such opinions are subject to change without notice. This article has been distributed for informational purposes only. Forecasts, estimates, and certain information contained herein should not be considered as investment advice or a recommendation of any particular security, strategy or investment product. Information contained herein has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but not guaranteed.


View the original article here