Subway To Build EV Charging Playgrounds, 'Oasis' For Diners (businessinsider.com) 155
Subway said on Tuesday it plans to add charging parks to select restaurants. "Dubbed Subway Oasis, the EV parks will be outfitted with 'charging canopies with multiple ports, picnic tables, Wi-Fi, restrooms, green space, and even playgrounds,'" reports Insider. From the report: Subway is working with EV tech startups GenZ EV Solution and RED E Charging to open these parks. Additionally, the company said that Subway is opening smaller fast-charging EV stations at new or newly remodeled restaurants across the US this year. "On average, the smaller-format, fast EV chargers will offer a 120-mile charge in 17 minutes for approximately $20," the company said. Once open, EV customers might also get the added perk of receiving Subway discounts while waiting for their cars to charge, the company said. Subway did not specify how much it would cost consumers to charge their cars at their new charging stations, nor did they mention where and when the first Subway Oasis would be built.
Seems a bit steep... (Score:2, Interesting)
the smaller-format, fast EV chargers will offer a 120-mile charge in 17 minutes for approximately $20
Let's see... If a gallon of diesel is priced $5 and I can go 40 miles per gallon, it would only cost me $15 in fuel to go 120 miles. But if I use my EV, I can pay $20 to go the same distance?
It gets worse when you consider my old Volkswagen turbo diesel actually gets 49 miles per gallon on the freeway, diesel is currently priced at $4 a gallon, and my 14.5 gallon tank gives me a driving range of 600 miles between stops for fuel.
Then if we also add in the cost of replacing my LEAF's traction battery every te
Re:Seems a bit steep... (Score:5, Interesting)
I always find it bizarre how people want to budget in the cost of a battery swap for an EV - parts that are warrantied for 8 years, and usually last hundreds of thousands of kilometers (at least on good EVs, that's typical for a Tesla) - but not budget in engine and transmission swaps for a comparable ICE at hundreds of thousands of kilometers. And how they want to budget the cost of a brand-new battery pack at today's prices, not the cost of a salvage pack or at prices 10-15 years in the future - on a product that has one of the most rapid price decline curves out there.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
bizarre how people want to budget in the cost of a battery swap for an EV - parts that are warrantied for 8 years, and usually last hundreds of thousands of kilometers (at least on good EVs, that's typical for a Tesla) - but not budget in engine and transmission swaps for a comparable ICE at hundreds of thousands of kilometers.
A Tesla costs $40K. That's over twice what I paid for my 2001 Volkswagen turbo diesel. I'm still on the original engine + transmission in that car -- a good diesel will last hundreds of thousands of miles before you need to replace those.
So what was your point again? Completely lost me.
how they want to budget the cost of a brand-new battery pack at today's prices, not the cost of a salvage pack or at prices 10-15 years in the future - on a product that has one of the most rapid price decline curves out there.
My old 2013 Nissan LEAF needs a replacement pack today, not 10-15 years in the future.
As for "salvage packs," they're in very short supply. It's not everyday that someone crashes a newish LEAF, so good luck finding one. If yo
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
A Tesla costs $40K. That's over twice what I paid for my 2001 Volkswagen turbo diesel. I'm still on the original engine + transmission in that car [...] My old 2013 Nissan LEAF needs a replacement pack today, not 10-15 years in the future.
How did the same person decide both to buy one of the best small diesels ever made, and also one of the worst EVs, and then go on to make a direct comparison between them? I call shenanigans.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I paid $600 for a 2004 Honda Fit/Jazz that is also on the original engine and transmission. Therefore all other cars are overpriced garbage.
Re: (Score:2)
Side note, it's a shame Honda discontinued the Fit/Jazz here in the US. The new model looks amazing.
Re: (Score:2)
Well it's not a giant SUV so who's going to buy it?
This one really feels like a cheap econobox (which is fair enough) but it looks like they managed to make the new one actually quite pleasant without making it too expensive.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nissan Leaf cars are trash. Notorious for battery failures. Also Volt and Bolt.
Buy a good EV.
Re:Seems a bit steep... (Score:5, Insightful)
Some people are just afraid of any change and will come up with completely inane arguments to justify their existing opinion since they aren't actually looking for the real answer. Just yesterday I just saw this comment on a local car review site about the electric Volvo XC40, paraphrased:
So the consumption is 25kWh/100km, with our grid it means 15kg of coal burned, and that's bad!
That's it, that's the entire complaint with lots of people agreeing. But it's not even doing the right math, or they'd see that this 400HP SUV which can do 0-60 under 5 seconds has lower CO2 emissions than an average gas car (which here probably means a 1l econobox), or that the emissions aren't dumped into your face, or that the grid can be improved by building one more reactor or a few windmills (which are also bad).
Engines and transmissions = delicate & expensi (Score:5, Insightful)
Most original owners will not keep a BEV nearly long enough for a battery swap and most ICE owners don't wear out their original drivetrain. The vehicle is generally sold to a used buyer by then as people with new car money are under no pressure to hang onto their toys (a new vehicle is a luxury purchase after all).
Non-mechanics (whose uninformed opinions tend to be worthless) tend to confuse BEV batteries with 12v ICE engine starting batteries when it comes to longevity expectations. One thing is not like the other.
Re: (Score:2)
> Non-mechanics (whose uninformed opinions tend to be worthless)
This is an unworthy stab at non-mechanics. NOBODY'S uninformed opinion is worth anything unless you're a psychologist studying how people learn.
Re: (Score:2)
Most original owners will not keep a BEV nearly long enough for a battery swap
But for anyone to buy a used BEV, they had better be ready for it and factor it into the used price. As if buying a used car wasn't already risky enough, now you're playing with a several thousand dollar hot potato.
Re: (Score:3)
And how they want to budget the cost of a brand-new battery pack at today's prices, not the cost of a salvage pack or at prices 10-15 years in the future - on a product that has one of the most rapid price decline curves out there.
When the global demand for raw materials increases at many more times current extraction rates, it's quite ignorant to assume the kind of warmongering and corruption required to sustain the delusion of "rapid price decline" will continue to be voted for in the future.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I've driven cars with 20 year old engines & tr (Score:2)
As for "today's prices" the cost of automobiles is skyrocketing. It's basically a race between improving tech and companies jacking up prices because they can. So far the latter is winning.
It's actually causing a bit of consternation among adults because their kids don't want to bother with driver's licenses since they can't afford their own car. So that the only thing ge
Re:Seems a bit steep... (Score:5, Informative)
For what it's worth, my last fast-charge session was 15.73 kwh for $7.84 (which includes session fee). For me that works out to about 70 miles of range, for a cost of about $0.11/mile.
At $5 for 40 miles with diesel that's $0.125/mile.
Of course that was six months ago 'cause I do virtually all my charging at home, where 15.73 kwh would only cost me $2.36, or $0.034/mile...
=Smidge=
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Seems a bit steep... (Score:4, Insightful)
Let's see... If a gallon of diesel is priced $5 and I can go 40 miles per gallon, it would only cost me $15 in fuel to go 120 miles. But if I use my EV, I can pay $20 to go the same distance?
It gets worse when you consider my old Volkswagen turbo diesel actually gets 49 miles per gallon on the freeway, diesel is currently priced at $4 a gallon, and my 14.5 gallon tank gives me a driving range of 600 miles between stops for fuel.
Wait 'til you see the price of diesel a few years from now...
Re: (Score:2)
With a little set-up Diesels don't have to run on fossil fuels.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not when I can grow my own.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
the smaller-format, fast EV chargers will offer a 120-mile charge in 17 minutes for approximately $20
Let's see... If a gallon of diesel is priced $5 and I can go 40 miles per gallon, it would only cost me $15 in fuel to go 120 miles. But if I use my EV, I can pay $20 to go the same distance?
It's almost as if you think prices can't ever change.
As soon as Subway's nearest competitor installs them too then that price will go down.
Diesel? The only way the price of diesel is going is UP!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Utility monopolies must maintain their profits so won't ever let electricity be cheap or free. (And don't dare to even think of putting solar on your roof.)
120 mile charge is about 30 kWh which should cost $3 ($0.10/kWh). Instead you are being charged $0.66 kWh.
(My solar PV gives me 25 years of electricity at $0.07 kWh)
Yes, you are being gouged for electricity (and also for diesel at $5/gal).
Re: (Score:2)
Free sunshine does not lead to free electricity. There are other costs, as well as middlemen to collect rents. Calif, which has the largest fraction of solar market penetration, also has the highest electricity prices.
Re: Seems a bit steep... (Score:2)
A 120-mile charge is about 30 kWh. At wholesale power prices, that would cost $1-$2. Even at PG&E's retail prices, the cost would be $5-$12. So Subway is building in a pretty nice margin here.
Re: (Score:2)
If we want EV's to be successful, we absolutely can't gouge people on the cost of electricity to charge their EV's.
Overpriced BEV chargers are a pretty common thing in my neck of the woods, too. Somewhere around $0.35 per kWh is the point where a Tesla Model 3* and fueling my ICE econobox (achieves an EPA combined 34 MPG rating, and in real world use typically beats that) with $3.12/gal 87 octane, are roughly about equal in cost.
My guess is charging while out and about is still seen as a bit of a luxury, since most BEV owners I'd assume charge their cars at home.
* I don't own a Tesla, I'm going by the EPA 100 mile rati
Re:Seems a bit steep... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Seems a bit steep... (Score:4, Interesting)
I tend to agree with almost everything you say.
EVs are usually better than ICE, but it depends on the battery size (you might want to read this report from ADEME, the french agency for energy/environment stuffs: https://librairie.ademe.fr/mob... [ademe.fr]). For instance, with a battery size of 100kWh, an EV is better CO2eq-wise after ~100000km. With a battery size of 22kWh, an EV is better after ~14000km. Of course, they are not for the same usage.
My point was not seriously to completely shift out of a car-centric society: I don't think it's either realistic or even doable in the near future. My point is that it seems that recently, a lot of people have taken an interest in CO2 emissions, which is a good thing, even if a bit late. However, if you keep digging after that first "door", you start to realize that even if we can contain those emissions to not go over 2C by the end of the century, there are other "doors" waiting for us, like minerals availability (which in turn require more and more energy to extract, as we tap to less and less dense deposits).
This is what I meant by "shifting the problem": removing the pressure on fossil fuels/CO2 emissions, and putting it on minerals resources.
Fun fact: to build an EV, you need ~75 of the 85 natural elements that can be found in nature (periodic table, from which you remove synthetic elements and those that can only be found in traces; don't focus on the 85, depending on how you count them you can end up to 92, or 93...).
Re: (Score:3)
The good thing about batteries is they don't get consumed when making the car like fossil fuels do. Even after the car reaches its end of life (most likely well after driving the distance it becomes better CO2-wise) the battery can be taken out and recycled for a new one at much lower CO2 cost.
Now with EVs being relatively new, the infrastructure for large scale battery recycling is just getting off the ground, but as their popularity increase I'd expect to see it as common as lead-acid batteries which we
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I live in the country, thanks for playing.
No. I'm not moving to an overpriced dystopia. I already have Solar in terms of power and limited grid capability. My Grid is flakey as fuck so going Solar keeps me online.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, we all live in a yellow submarine where homeowners are willing to have hi-rise multi-family units built right alongside them.
The car may have allowed for urban sprawl but it's naive to think that a bunch of EVs is suddenly going to remake society. The problem was adequately
documented in South Park's SMUG Alert episode. [imdb.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
homeowners who have invested 100s of thousands and millions of dollars into their urban lifestyle aren't going to tolerate developments that they feel will degrade their property value. They vote and are vociferous about that subject.
As for the idea that cities are somehow part of an "overpriced dystopia" - a major reason why cities are so expensive is demand, that a lot of people want to live there. That makes them the exact opposite of a dystopia. (Of course part of why cities are expensive also is that modern zoning and building codes are highly restrictive and bureaucratic so we aren't building enough housing but that would not be an issue without the very high demand.)
I've lived in many urban/suburban environments and you haven't seen anger when Sprint wants to put up a cell tower or a church wants to put up a soccer/baseball field sports complex with lighting that's 30 feet in the air.
Developers and Homeowners get litigious very quickly wh
Re:Seems a bit steep... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
> And, as far as "free if there's sufficient sunshine"... I guess all the PV panels and other infrastructure will be supplied by the Green Energy Faerie?
puts on sci-fi rose-colored glasses ... yeah, new electricity becomes free.
Once we get the self-replicating von Neumann machines up to the moon and converting regolith into solar panels and transmission towers
Re: (Score:2)
- fossil fuels are running out. Peak for conventional oil was in 2008 (source: World Energy Outlook 2018 report, IEA). Shale oil is masking that, but it is a finite resource too. Not counting the fact that since we started extracting it, more than 75% of the companies involved in it have been investing more than what they got from it. And that investment is not sustainable either, because shale oil "wells" are short-lived, so you won't see a ROI later on if you don't already have it.
The weasel word there is "conventional". As new technology is developed oil that was once considered unreachable or unprofitable becomes economical to produce. So fracking isn't "masking" it, fracking is an example of new tech that makes new sources of fossil fuels available. As for the ROI, fracking wells are inexpensive to drill and are not expected to be long lived. It's a very different situation from deep water drilling. "Peak oil" really is a myth, as bad as everything Paul Ehrlich ever breathles
Lithium, too [Re:Seems a bit steep...] (Score:2)
The weasel word there is "conventional". As new technology is developed oil that was once considered unreachable or unprofitable becomes economical to produce.
I'm surprised that people easily accept, for the oil industry, the fact that when there's a profit to be made, new technology is developed to increase production.
But when slashdotters talk about electric cars, they accept "there is no possible source of lithium than what we currently have, and therefore shortage of lithium prevent widespread adoption of battery electric vehicles."
No: the lesson learned is that when something get scarce but needed, people find alternate sources.
Re: (Score:2)
The weasel word there is "conventional".
Not really. Conventional oil is a well-known notion, and its definition is shared by every expert on the subject.
"Peak oil" really is a myth
If you believe oil resources are infinite, or high enough so it won't be/isn't a problem, there is not much to add.
Fracking is proven technology and by now should be considered "conventional".
As for "peak oil", US proven reserves of oil and gas keep going UP not down. https://www.eia.gov/naturalgas... [eia.gov]
This is because with new technology new sources become available.
Re: (Score:2)
The increase of proven reserves needs to be indexed to the cost of extraction. Back when the US oil boom started all it took was a small crew, a couple of trucks, and some pipes to get oil out of the ground. The extraction cost was negligible. The ease and wealth of oil was immortalized in the television show The Beverly Hillbillies and the board games Gusher, Oil Power, and King Oil. (See Boardgamegeek.com)
Today, however, extracting oil is damned expensive. Instead of driving out into the Texas badlands wi
Re: (Score:2)
The increase of proven reserves needs to be indexed to the cost of extraction. Back when the US oil boom started all it took was a small crew, a couple of trucks, and some pipes to get oil out of the ground. The extraction cost was negligible. The ease and wealth of oil was immortalized in the television show The Beverly Hillbillies and the board games Gusher, Oil Power, and King Oil. (See Boardgamegeek.com)
Today, however, extracting oil is damned expensive. Instead of driving out into the Texas badlands with a couple trucks we're having to explore a mile deep, under miles of water -- from Gulf to Arctic. We've had to invent new drilling techniques, from side to slant, and new extraction technologies such as fracking.
Yes, we've invented new tech, but it ain't cheap or easy to use. We aren't going to run out of oil, we're just not going to want to pay for it at the cost it takes to extract it profitably.
Sure, after the low hanging fruit was plucked they had to drill deeper and into harsher places, and develop fracking and other technologies. Depending on the approach there is some point below which it is unprofitable to produce. But when the demand exceeds the supply the price goes up, and more wells become profitable to operate again. As long as there is demand there will be supply.
Re: (Score:2)
It already is. A proven reserve [investopedia.com] is one where the oil can be extracted at less cost than it can be sold for.
Re: (Score:2)
Fracking is proven technology and by now should be considered "conventional".
The term "conventional oil" does not relate to the fact that a technology is proven or not: https://info.keystoneenergytoo... [keystoneenergytools.com]
As for "peak oil", US proven reserves of oil and gas keep going UP not down.
Past performance is not indicative of future results ;)
More seriously, this is why we should use the added time that fracking gives us to find more sustainable solutions (unless, again, you believe reserves will go up indefinitely, and price would either go down or stay the same...). Also, the more we burn fossil fuels, the more CO2 is put in the atmosphere, the more problems we generate for ourselves later on... whatever the method of extraction.
The article says "The term “unconventional oil” refers to oil that is obtained without using the traditional method. "
It's just not a very meaningful term. Regardless of how the are doing it, they are producing it.
As for the rest, all true. As new energy sources become available demand on fossil fuels will decline, which mean the existing supply will even longer without discovering new sources and ways to produce them. But the CO2 point is a reflection on the demand, not the supply, and we hav
Re: (Score:2)
One subchoice of "change your way of life" is to die. That's a foolproof way to avoid being impacted by these facts, and one exercised by millions every day.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Don't look back in anger (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So, I guess while her car is charging, Sally can wait, while eating a sandwich.
Is that a problem? Seems like a good business move to me.
My experience with an EV (Score:5, Interesting)
Along the main roads you'll find a lot of charging stations, the McDonald's, KFC's and the like are among the first and best.
So my experience tells me the (junk) food and coffee consumed while charging is only marginally cheaper than the cost of the charge.
In other words, it's a smart move by existing stops to add EV charging and pull in additional customers.
Re:My experience with an EV (Score:5, Interesting)
EV charging has opened up a big new market. A petrol station needs large tanks and regular deliveries. The pumps are expensive and there are a lot of regulations to keep it all safe. People don't like the smell of petrol and car exhausts either, so it's not a good place to hang around.
EV chargers are much easier and cheaper to install and operate. That means many more places can have them, rather than just big operators with plenty of resources and multiple locations.
Re: (Score:3)
DCFC stations are extremely expensive. About $40K per dispenser, versus about $4K per dispenser at a gas station. Even when you factor in tank installation, a modest charging station will cost maybe double a typical gas station.
A big part of this is EV chargers are still not manufactured at the same volume as gasoline dispensers. Another factor is just the cost of labor and materials is simply higher.
For $2Mil you get a gas station with mini-mart and 8-10 dispensers, canopy, signage, landscaping. For that s
Re: (Score:2)
So if I already had a parking lot with a fast food place or mini-mart, I could invest that money and make my site more attractive to a new and potentially growing set of customers that may not have considered my location previously...is that what you meant?
Re: (Score:2)
No, what I meant was exactly what I said: That the parent comment's statement -
- is incorrect. The situation may change in the future, but for now EV charging infrastructure is considerably more expensive than petroleum fueling infrastructure.
=Smidge=
Re: (Score:3)
Even when you factor in tank installation, a modest charging station will cost maybe double a typical gas station.
Like EVs themselves, the up front cost is higher. Also like EVs, the recurring costs are lower. You don't need as much permitting and inspection, and electricity is cheaper than fuel — filling stations literally make little to nothing selling fuel, it's so expensive. And you're never going to have to dig up tanks and spend a bunch of money to have soil removed and expensively processed or landfilled. The vehicles still represent a fire risk, but they're less likely to catch fire while charging than IC
Re: (Score:2)
Must be different in the US, in the UK petrol pumps are very expensive. They are precision measurement devices and heavily regulated. Lots of safety requirements, comms for payment.
But will it work? (Score:4, Insightful)
A recent study found at least 20% of all charging events [marketwatch.com] (the attempt to charge a vehicle while not at home) failed. The reasons being software problems, charging stations damaged, or payment processing errors.
Will this be any different?
Re:But will it work? (Score:5, Interesting)
It used to be that way in Europe, before the market matured. The newer chargers are much more reliable, and the operators have got better at maintaining them.
Even so, there are still issues that need to be worked out. For AC chargers there is often no clear way to report failures, and they don't get fixed quickly. The problem seems to be the owners of the land they are installed on, e.g. the car park operator, not having systems in place to report and deal with faults promptly.
For high power DC chargers they used to have a lot more issues, but they have got better at recovering from them. Nowadays most of the problems are with new cars having software incompatibilities. The big advantage of CHAdeMO is that it's very simple, CCS is much more complex. Still, that only tends to last a few months after the cars first hit the market, and once one manufacturer is sorted out any new models will likely work straight away.
Re: (Score:2)
"EVs are bad because the infrastructure is unreliable," explained the vandal.
Alternative Proposal (Score:2)
How about they try making bread that doesn't taste like it's 50% Aluminum by volume?
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.cnbc.com/2014/04/1... [cnbc.com]
Re: (Score:2)
You really should try their garlic and herb bread. It tastes like 40% aluminum, 10% grass
120-mile charge in 17 minutes for approximately$20 (Score:2)
That doesn't sound so cheap even for places where the gas is like 90% various taxes. And this is when they're trying to push adoption, by the time when they are fully taxing this, plus the demand creating various infrastructure shortages we'll probably have the price of a small charge costing the same as a full tank able to take you 5+ times further. Never mind the extra time needed for all the charging.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think gas stations make an overhead of about 10 cents per gallon. For a 25MPG car, that's about 40 cents of profit for 100 mile range.
Re: (Score:3)
That doesn't sound so cheap even for places where the gas is like 90% various taxes.
It might be if you get a suitable discount on your Subway sandwich.
Maybe Subway is trying to reserve these chargers for Subway customers so they priced them accordingly.
Re: (Score:3)
That doesn't sound so cheap even for places where the gas is like 90% various taxes. And this is when they're trying to push adoption, by the time when they are fully taxing this, plus the demand creating various infrastructure shortages we'll probably have the price of a small charge costing the same as a full tank able to take you 5+ times further. Never mind the extra time needed for all the charging.
They are already talking about taxing EV's somehow to replace the lost revenue from gasoline taxes. The roads still need to be paid for.
Tax on electric cars [Re:120-mile charge...] (Score:2)
They are already talking about taxing EV's somehow to replace the lost revenue from gasoline taxes. The roads still need to be paid for.
Talking? They are doing it.
In Ohio, you pay a tax on your car registration if it's a hybrid, because you use less gas and thus pay less taxes to maintain the roads; and you pay a higher tax on your car registration if it's electric.
The bill to mandate this was heavily pushed by the oil companies.
Re: (Score:2)
They are already talking about taxing EV's somehow to replace the lost revenue from gasoline taxes. The roads still need to be paid for.
Talking? They are doing it.
In Ohio, you pay a tax on your car registration if it's a hybrid, because you use less gas and thus pay less taxes to maintain the roads; and you pay a higher tax on your car registration if it's electric.
The bill to mandate this was heavily pushed by the oil companies.
They would have done it without the oil companies. The revenue goes to the taxing authority, not the oil company. But the oil companies had an interest in EV's being taxed equivalently since the taxes were intended for road maintenance.
Re: (Score:2)
In Ohio, you pay a tax on your car registration if it's a hybrid, because you use less gas and thus pay less taxes to maintain the roads; and you pay a higher tax on your car registration if it's electric. The bill to mandate this was heavily pushed by the oil companies.
They would have done it without the oil companies.
Maybe. Or maybe not. This particular tax bill was heavily pushed by oil companies, who desperately want to kill electric vehicles.
So, what we currently have is the Federal government subsidizes electric cars, and the state govenment taxes electric cars, so the net result is the Federal government is sending money to the states. Would be simpler if they just did that directly, rather than giving money to car owners which the states then take away.
Re: (Score:2)
In Ohio, you pay a tax on your car registration if it's a hybrid, because you use less gas and thus pay less taxes to maintain the roads; and you pay a higher tax on your car registration if it's electric. The bill to mandate this was heavily pushed by the oil companies.
They would have done it without the oil companies.
Maybe. Or maybe not. This particular tax bill was heavily pushed by oil companies, who desperately want to kill electric vehicles.
So, what we currently have is the Federal government subsidizes electric cars, and the state govenment taxes electric cars, so the net result is the Federal government is sending money to the states. Would be simpler if they just did that directly, rather than giving money to car owners which the states then take away.
That's not the right way to look at it. Road construction and repair must be financed, and the financing was previously provided via gasoline taxes.
That seems reasonable, more gas equates to more road usage.
But cars that don't use gas are using the same roads, so they need a different way to collect road tax revenue from them. Unless you believe the roads should be free for EV's, but that really makes no sense. Localities were OK with letting them slide when EV's where .000001% of the cars on the road bu
Re: (Score:3)
Subway is just saying OK to some EV startups burning VC investment money on a bad business idea.
Subway gets ESG points and assumes minimal risk.
VC's may be counting on a huge government bailout to save them from reality.
That's a $9 trip in a Prius at current prices or a $12 trip in a Corolla which after capex remains cheaper until 179,000 miles.
Lithium cars still need 500,000 pounds of ore dug out of the earth using Diesel - all that has to be paid for.
Re: 120-mile charge in 17 minutes for approximatel (Score:2)
While the capex on an EV battery is currently significant, it certainly isn't because of the diesel to dig it out. A big operation would probably have a rock truck like a 793F that easily holds 250 tons in a single load despite 500,000 pounds looking like a huge number. I think we can assume it doesn't take all 1300 gallons of fuel in a 793F's tanks to drive a few miles round trip. Maybe a few gallons? A 740 truck would do that in 6 trips probably in under an hour and that burns about 5 gallons/hr, but
Happy places (Score:2)
Why is it that remote "gas stations" feature so frequently in apocalyptic &/or horror movies?
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I'd love to hang out in or around a car park on plastic furniture next to a prefab shed & consume minimum viable product food-like substances.
Lots of people do just exactly that. Fast food outsells conventional restaurants in the US by more than a factor of two.
Thanks, But I'll Push My EV (Score:4, Funny)
10 cents a mile? Holy crap! For that kind of money, I'll buy an extra sub or two and push my EV.
Re: (Score:2)
10 cents a mile? Holy crap! For that kind of money, I'll buy an extra sub or two and push my EV.
Is it easy to push an EV?
Re: (Score:2)
Once it's going downhill. . . .
Anyway, $20 for 120 miles is 16.67 cents per mile.
I really want an EV, but I can't yet justify it, between tens of thousands for initial acquisition, external updates to my garage-less home for level 2 charging (people of the night steal things here, so charging at night outdoors is a risk), and punitive extra registration fees meant to make up for EV owners not paying gas taxes.
My little econobox gets 30 MPG (US), and fuel prices are around $3/gallon here now, so that works o
Re: (Score:2)
Once it's going downhill. . . .
Anyway, $20 for 120 miles is 16.67 cents per mile.
I really want an EV, but I can't yet justify it, between tens of thousands for initial acquisition, external updates to my garage-less home for level 2 charging (people of the night steal things here, so charging at night outdoors is a risk), and punitive extra registration fees meant to make up for EV owners not paying gas taxes.
My little econobox gets 30 MPG (US), and fuel prices are around $3/gallon here now, so that works out to 10 cents per mile.
Same here. An EV would fit my needs and I have a garage, but it's much cheaper for me to just drive what I have. Even if the EV fuel is free I'm only spending around $300/month in gas for all four or my cars (lots of kids that drive). I haven't bought a new car in many years, never have a car payment, so an EV would really be an expensive toy.
Rural Subway near interstate (Score:2)
There's a Subway 20 minutes from here, very rural right off the interstate in their own stand-alone building that would be absolutely perfect for this. Most subways I know of in this region are in plazas, grocery stores, gas stations and other places where they wouldn't have the ability to do this. However that stand-alone one is certainly the type of location they would do this. I wouldn't be surprised if this is one in the first batch they roll this out to.
Mapped location if anyone is interested... [google.com]
charging 2 to 3 times going rater/Kwh (Score:3)
They can't make sandwiches, they're looking to sell themselves and now a new business model.
What business are you in Subway?
If I want a sub, I go down the street to Firehouse, they still remember how they're made.
Re: (Score:2)
Subway sandwiches aren't that bad. No great, but certainly not disgusting, unlike the McDonands burger I foolishly chose to have for lunch yesterday.
Certainly an interesting pivot or new direction though. From sandwiches to EV charging!!
It does make a little sense to extent that EV charge time is about as long as it takes to scarf down a subway sandwich, but got to wonder how may Subway locations have room for this, or could even justify the cost of a single EV charge point in the parking lot (if they have
Re: (Score:2)
I can see up-front parking now filled up with EVs. It's akin to those who go to gas stations and then park at the pumps.
Re: (Score:2)
This would be great if... (Score:2, Funny)
This would be great if there was something other than Subway to eat there. Even before it was revealed that the bread has plastic and sugar, I tried their stuff and knew it was awful. That so many people routinely eat there and even like it is one of those things that makes me wonder if I'm on the wrong planet. It's too bad their spokesman being a pedo didn't kill it. All while Quiznos, which had a delicious French dip sandwich, went broke. Sigh...
Picture not by a Tesla driver (Score:2)
Same (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The price they quote is almost exactly twice what I pay to drive the same number of miles in my CR-V.
I'm guessing you missed the forehead-slappingly obvious part where the summary says, "...receiving Subway discounts while waiting for their cars to charge".
Subway wants to keep these chargers free for Subway customers. They don't want every Tom, Dick and Harry using them.
You want to charge your car and not eat at Subway? Expect to pay for it.
Subway has most places in strip malls so they may (Score:2)
Subway has most places in strip malls so they may be limited on what they do at them. Also the strip mall may say free for any customer of the full strip mall.
Re: (Score:2)
In the US, the breakeven point between EV vs ICE incremental travel costs is when gasoline is $5/gal. Right now, on avg, it is cheaper to drive an ICE. That includes only the price of fuel.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Then $5 was no longer an option.
It's called inflation. Subway can't be held responsible for that.
Re: (Score:2)
It's called inflation. Subway can't be held responsible for that.
I get that part of course.
But they also dropped massively in food quality, and more importantly, became really unhealthy.
The latest health reports were just the icing on the cake.
(And, if you were vegan/muslim/jewish for example, do you want to be served bacon grease and pork in your veggie sandwich?)