backtop


Print 87 comment(s) - last by sigmatau.. on Nov 5 at 3:20 PM


Ford Focus Electric
Ford Focus Electric won't come cheap

We first brought you news of the production Ford Focus Electric earlier this year when it was officially unveiled at CES 2011 in Las Vegas. Now, Ford has spilled the beans on how much the all-electric car will cost when it debuted next year.
 
According to Ford's new online price configurator/reservation page, the Focus Electric will have a base price of $39,200 plus a destination charge of $795 bringing the total to $39,995. Since the U.S. government is handing money out left and right for "green" vehicles, the price of the Ford Focus Electric drops to $32,495 after a $7,500 federal tax credit.
 
To put this pricing in perspective, the all-electric Nissan Leaf has a base MSRP of $36,050 while the Chevrolet Volt has a base MSRP of $39,995. Both of those figures are before the $7,500 federal tax credit is taken into consideration.
 
The Focus Electric is powered by a 123hp (181 lb-ft torque) electric motor and a 23 kWh lithium-ion battery pack that was co-developed with LG Chem. Top speed for the vehicle is a relatively meager 84 mph.
 
There’s no word on how far the Focus Electric will go on a charge, but we’re guessing that it will be targeting the Nissan’s Leaf’s EPA rating of 73 miles on a charge.

Source: Ford Focus Electric Homepage



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By Stiggalicious on 11/2/2011 5:22:49 PM , Rating: 5
OK, here's the assumptions:
-Gas stays $4/gal for the life of the car.
-Electricity stays at $.13/kWh.
-It takes the 23kWh battery pack to go 100 miles in the Focus, and charging the batteries is 100% efficient.
-Driving 12,000 miles per year.
-$7,500 tax credit has been taken on the electric

Gas: 40mpg @ 12,000 mi/yr = 300Gal/yr = $1,200/yr.
Electric: 23kWh/100mi = 2,760kWh/yr = $358.80/yr.

This makes a nice, simple system of linear equations:
gas: y = 1,200x + 18,200
electric: y = 358.8x + 32495

Solving for x gives you 16.99 years.

Just providing some raw calculations for your numeric pleasure =]


By UnauthorisedAccess on 11/2/2011 5:38:33 PM , Rating: 2
If (a big if) this car comes to Australia then it'll suffer at the hands of AUD$.40/kWh (US$.42/kWh ish) peak costs.

Unless you've got ample photovoltaic then this car would be purchased purely as an environmental statement and not a financial one.


By Putradude on 11/2/2011 6:33:06 PM , Rating: 5
Here in Quebec / Canada assuming 1 USD = 1 CAD
electricity is at $.07/kWh(almost 100% from hydroelectricity)and gas is highly taxed at $5.00/gal. This making electric vehicle more viable in our economy.

Using Stiggalicious example, it will cost:
gas: 300Gal/yr = $1500/yr
Electric: 2,760kWh/yr = $193.20/yr

gas: y = 1500x +18200
electric: y = 193.20x +32495
x gives 10.94 years or 131 000 miles
price on gas grow faster than electricity so electric car in near futur will become favorable in Quebec


By Kerdal on 11/2/2011 7:27:07 PM , Rating: 3
Except for our damn winters which basically kill any battery. They would need to make a serious breakthrough on battery technology before we can hope for a viable BEV or expend the energy to keep the battery compartment heated which means an increased cost (would've to keep plugged in all the time it's not in use, etc.) and/or reduced battery life.

But then again, I'm in the far northwest part of the province, it's usually a bit worse here. (And I'm talking true north not 1 hour north of Mtl)


By EddyKilowatt on 11/2/2011 6:50:09 PM , Rating: 2
Why would you charge it during peak hours, unless you absolutely had to?

Charge it at night, drive it during the day. Don't buy it if your day regularly features more than 100 miles of driving.

What are your 10PM to 5 AM rates like down there?


By sigmatau on 11/2/2011 8:32:01 PM , Rating: 2
My electric company does not have peak hours for some reason. I am not sure if nuclear power has anything to do with it.


By ppardee on 11/2/2011 8:53:35 PM , Rating: 2
Peak/Off-peak hours are less about the power source and more about demand... it's hard to spin up/spin down any type of generation and there is a maximum capacity of the sources, so when demand exceeds immediate supply, they buy the power from other companies and do so at a premium. So, when demand is high, they try to discourage use by charging more and get the added benefit of having the outsourced power paid for by consumers.


By MonkeyPaw on 11/2/2011 6:26:52 PM , Rating: 2
You can't assume 40mpg for the life of the car, as you're more likely to see 30-35mpg net over the lifetime of the car. Electric is good for urban driving, and gas does best on the highway. It's why hybrids are a better bet these days.


By RDO CA on 11/2/2011 7:23:48 PM , Rating: 2
Cost to charge is probably less than you figured as the battery is a 23kwh but they will not use all of it so you do not have to charge all. The Volt has a 16KWH battery and they have a bottom and top buffer so the total usable is 10.4 KWH. which gives the 40 miles.


By kjboughton on 11/2/2011 8:16:12 PM , Rating: 2
Assumptions of 100% charger efficiency are a pipe dream as well. Use 93% as this is about as good as it gets (for now).


By YashBudini on 11/3/2011 12:33:07 AM , Rating: 2
When it comes to electrical components you can bet heat = waste (heaters excluded). Generators, motors, transformers, power converters, nobody's perfect.


By tng on 11/3/2011 7:33:40 AM , Rating: 3
He at least put it in there, didn't check all his calcs.

What I am surprised at is that you don't point out what I think is obvious here, 16 years, 13 years to a breakeven point? Are you kidding me?

The people who espouse all of the great attributes of EVs are the same people who are always telling us about how better batteries are just around the corner or the Super Capacitor is just a matter of time.

Normally these people have not one iota of real world engineering knowledge and yet they would want to keep a car (16 years) supposedly long after the ultimate battery makes it's appearance? Right.

The ultimate environmental statement is driving a reasonably fuel efficient car and keeping it for a good long time (10+ years), not some EV.


By retrospooty on 11/3/2011 8:38:03 AM , Rating: 2
"16 years, 13 years to a breakeven point? Are you kidding me?"

That is assuming only 12k miles per year. Alot of people drive more than that. I do 30k per year easily, so that less than halves it. I could see this working for fleet vehicles that drive even more than I do... But not for std. consumers yet. I'll stick with my 2012 Civic's 39mpg.


By tng on 11/3/2011 9:07:28 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah, should have thought of that as my own commute is 50 miles one way.

I notice that allot of the people here who do comment pro or con on these things just assume that people live in a large metro area and have short commutes. That explains why so many people are so pro EV, they just assume that their situation is typical.


By rdhood on 11/4/2011 4:11:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I notice that allot of the people here who do comment pro or con on these things just assume that people live in a large metro area and have short commutes. That explains why so many people are so pro EV, they just assume that their situation is typical.


Bingo. That is the environmentalist/Democrat social engineering aspect of this. They don't assume anything. The want to artificially raise gasoline prices (through taxes) to FORCE you into these conditions. Then, they want to make driving so expensive that you will take mass transit. Signs at the "Occupy" protests deem that no one should live in a house with more than four rooms.

Some of us, though, are realists. I have lived in the same house for almost 20 years. Through mergers, acquisitions, layoffs, I have worked at 4 different sites separated from each other by up to 50 miles. There is nowhere I could have lived in the past 20 years where I could have been guaranteed that an EV would be sufficient for the life of the vehicle. If one's life is so static that you know you will never need to go more than 60 or 80 miles round trip... and you can afford it... more power to you. But these are NOT general purpose vehicles that will suit the life experiences of most people.


By iamezza on 11/3/2011 7:00:08 PM , Rating: 2
Problem is how would you rack up these massive miles in a car that has a range of ~75miles before requiring a recharge time of a few hours.. without a fast-charge / battery-swap infrastructure in place first I don't see how it could work.


By Spuke on 11/3/2011 3:24:39 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
What I am surprised at is that you don't point out what I think is obvious here, 16 years, 13 years to a breakeven point? Are you kidding me?
I saw that too but the cost of electricity stuck out more because that would throw all his calcs out the window.

quote:
Normally these people have not one iota of real world engineering knowledge and yet they would want to keep a car (16 years) supposedly long after the ultimate battery makes it's appearance? Right.
The thing is that most of these people are NOT going to buy an EV. They just want them built and "everyone else" to buy them. Cost seems to be a prevailing issue among those that support EV's and these are seemingly out of "their" price range. I want EV's to become the norm but I'm not going to buy one. Huh? LOL!


By rubbertoe on 11/3/2011 11:26:35 AM , Rating: 1
Assumptions: Gas stays at $4 / gallon for the life of the car.

ROFLMAO, yeah, gas is going to stay at $4.00 per gallon for 10 years. Gas was $2.00 per gallon in January 2009, now it's $4.00 per gallon. And based on that, you think it is not going up for 10 years? Come on...

Nobody knows what gas will cost in 10 years. But all you have to do is look at the news every month or so to see that the Middle East is going to get nothing but crazier and crazier sooner rather than later. Once Saudi Arabia goes Arab Spring, or Ghawar starts declining, gas is $10 per gallon. You can take that to the bank.

RT


By iamezza on 11/3/2011 7:08:54 PM , Rating: 2
ummm.. no.

There are so many other sources of oil than the middle east. A lot of potential sources of oil are simply too expensive to produce when the price of oil is low. If the price of oil went way up, suddenly there would be a whole host of other ways to produce oil that would now be profitable.


"What would I do? I'd shut it down and give the money back to the shareholders." -- Michael Dell, after being asked what to do with Apple Computer in 1997














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki