Connect with us

Published

on

As business and national attractions begin to finally open their doors to the public and even allow full capacity, the long-overdue list of activities to do this summer and beyond is miles long. A key factor in experiencing many of these ventures requires some time in your car, and hopefully, it’s an EV — perhaps even a Tesla. Below is a detailed breakdown of what EVs garner the lowest cost per mile, as well as a list of the most (and least) affordable states to charge and drive your Tesla.

Table of contents

How the data was gathered

To help determine the data used for the charts below, Zutobi put together an extensive EV miles report. To begin, the study had to determine the cost of electricity in the US as a whole but also in each individual state. These numbers were collected from the US Energy Information Administration.

The study then used this individual state data compared to a variety of different EVs’ battery capacity (kW) and actual range (miles). This data was sourced from the EV database to determine each EV’s estimated cost to charge, estimated cost per mile, estimated cost per 100 miles, and miles per $100.

Using all of the data combined, it can be determined which EVs boast the lowest cost per mile driven. Spoiler alert: Tesla is currently producing some of the most affordable vehicles on the road today based on cost per mile, but there are plenty of competitors mere cents behind them.

Below, you will find all the relevant data accompanied by tables and explanations. Let’s begin with what EVs currently sit as the best in the US for cost per mile and miles per $100.

Most affordable Tesla
Source: Zutobi

Tesla Model 3 the most affordable in terms of miles

From the data cited above, Tesla’s Model 3 sedan in multiple trims claims the top three spots in the US as the most affordable EV in terms of cost per mile.

As you can see in the chart, the Tesla Model 3 Standard Range Plus wins in every category, all on top of a 50 kW battery. With a “real range” of 210 miles, the data has determined that Model 3 SRP owners pay about $.030 per mile driven, which is just over $3.00 every 100 miles.

For $100, drivers can travel over 3,300 miles. For added texture, the drive from Los Angeles to New York City is about 2,800 miles. You’ll still need to stop plenty along the way, but that shouldn’t be too difficult on Tesla’s ever-growing Supercharger network.

The Tesla Model 3 Standard Range Plus sits as the most affordable ride per mile, followed by its alternative powertrains. However, there are plenty of other contenders out there nipping at the heels of Tesla’s most affordable EV. Below is a table of how other EV makes and models stack up.

How the other EVs ranked in cost per mile

Most affordable Tesla
Source: Zutobi

The most affordable states to drive a Tesla

Now that we’ve determined that the Tesla Model 3 will save you the most quiche per mile (sorry, Hyundai, so close!), we can use US electricity data to determine which state will allow you to drive further for the lowest cost. You may still have to pay for some tolls, though!

Here are the top three most affordable states in the US to drive a Model 3 Standard Range Plus EV. We will give you a hint: it’s not Hawaii.

#1: Oklahoma – The Sooner State topped the list as the most affordable place to charge and drive your Tesla in the US. According to the US data, the average price of electricity is $0.0892 per kWh, bringing the cost to fully charge the Tesla’s 50 kW battery around $4.46.

The estimated cost per mile comes out to $.021, which translates to $2.21 per 100 miles driven within state lines. That’s a total of 4,709 miles of range on only $100. Oklahoma is the 20th largest state in the US, and with a land area of nearly 69,000 miles, there is plenty of room to drive around and brag about how much money you’re saving.

#2: Missouri – The birthplace of Anheuser-Busch and the backdrop to Ozark now has a new claim to fame — the second most affordable state to drive your Tesla in. The average price of electricity is $0.0938 per kWh, meaning you can fully charge your Model 3 for about $4.69.

Getting more granular, the estimated cost per mile comes out to $.022, totaling $2.23 in funds for 100 miles of travel. For $100, you can travel 4,478 miles – plenty of range to drive around and see all the Show-Me State has to offer. I’d recommend skipping St. Louis and driving to a real city like Chicago — although Illinois is wayyy down at spot number 33 on the list below.

#3: Nebraska – The Cornhusker state is now one of the top three most affordable states to drive your Tesla. The average price of electricity just trails Missouri at $0.0941 per kWh, allowing Nebraskans to fully juice up their new Model 3 for $4.71, just two cents more than its neighbor Missouri.

At an estimated cost per mile of $0.022, you can charge 100 miles of range for just $2.24. For only $100 smackeroos, you would be able to see all of the farmland Nebraska has to offer, with an estimated range of 4,463 miles. I’m not sure if you’ve ever been to Nebraska, but you’ll probably get a good idea of what it looks like after about 100 miles. Don’t fret though Nebraska, Lady Gaga still loves ya.

The least affordable states to drive a Tesla

You’ve seen the best states for your Tesla — in a most affordable sense, at least. Now it’s time to see what states may not be so cost-effective for you and your EV travels. If you’re wondering why there are 51 spots, note that this data also includes Washington D.C. (make it a state already!) Here are the bottom three:

#49: Massachusetts – Unfortunately, the Baked Bean State has some of the most expensive electricity in the country, so EV owners might want to think twice before charging up. In fact, the average price of electricity is $0.2232 per kWh, more than double the top of our list. That’s $11.16 to fully charge your Model 3.

At an estimated cost per mile of $0.053, you’re looking at 100 miles of range for $5.31. With $100, you’d only garner a range of 1,881 in the Bay State. At least Bean town still has the Boston cream pie, so it’s not all bad — unless you don’t like stuffed pastries, then there’s probably nothing else to see in Massachusetts. It’s not that old of a state, is it?

#50: Rhode Island – The second least affordable state is Rhode Island, which is also the nation’s smallest. The average cost of electricity in “Little Rhody” is $0.2341 per kWh, which would cost you $11.71 to fully charge Tesla’s most affordable EV, the Model 3.

Cost per mile equals $0.056, just above Massachusetts, so you’re looking at 100 miles of range for… you guessed it, $5.61. Have $100 to burn on a road trip in the Northeast? Well, that will get you 1,794 miles of range, which is plenty to survey every inch of the 1,214 square miles the state has to offer.

#51: Hawaii – Aloha, indeed. The bottom of the list is one of the States’ prettiest, Hawaii. The Aloha State remains quite isolated from its American siblings, so its average cost of electricity reflects that. You’re looking at a whopping $0.3055 per kWh and $15.28 to charge your Tesla each time.

That’s $0.073 per mile or $7.27 for 100 miles of range. For 100 American dollars, you can drive for 1,375 miles. The biggest decision will be to decide which island to put your EV. I’d recommend the north shore of Oahu, personally. Mahalo!

How all 50 states (and D.C.) stack up

Most affordable Tesla
Source: Zutobi

Breaking down the data

As you can see from the chart above, there are three clear leaders for the most affordable state to charge your Tesla, but there are several other states just cents behind. If you live in one of the bottom states on the list, we apologize. If you live in Hawaii, you’re probably not too worried because… well, you live in Hawaii.

Regardless of where you are charging, you are still saving money in the long run compared to those archaic ICE vehicles, right? Look at you being green- and carbon-conscious. We’re so proud.

You should now be more informed regarding (about) how much electricity costs in your state and where the most affordable spot to move might be if you’re planning to buy that second Tesla.


Subscribe to Electrek on YouTube for exclusive videos and subscribe to the podcast.

Continue Reading

Entertainment

Ariana Grande rushed by red carpet intruder at premiere of Wicked: For Good

Published

on

By

Ariana Grande rushed by red carpet intruder at premiere of Wicked: For Good

Video footage has shown the moment singer and actress Ariana Grande was accosted by a fan at a film premiere.

Ms Grande was in Singapore for the debut of Wicked: For Good when the incident unfolded on Thursday.

The video captured the moment the fan scaled the barricade and pushed past photographers towards Ms Grande.

Pic: tacotrvck_vb/X/via REUTERS
Image:
Pic: tacotrvck_vb/X/via REUTERS

He then threw his arms around her, before co-star Cynthia Erivo intervened and security swoops in to stop him.

The man, now identified as Johnson Wen, 26, is reportedly a notorious red carpet crasher.

Wen, who has since been charged with being a public nuisance, goes by the nickname Pyjama Man, and gloated as he shared footage of the intrusion online.

“Dear Ariana Grande, Thank You for letting me Jump on the Yellow Carpet with You,” he wrote on Instagram.

More on Ariana Grande

Pic: tacotrvck_vb/X/via REUTERS
Image:
Pic: tacotrvck_vb/X/via REUTERS

In video stories posted to the site beforehand, he was seen at the Universal Studios venue, revealing his intentions.

In one, he said: “I feel like I’m in a dream, that’s my best friend, Ariana Grande, and I’m gonna meet her. I’ve been dreaming about that.”

Read more:
When you should actually arrive at cinema to avoid ads
TV and film’s obsession with upper-class actors

The Australian has ambushed several performers on stage, according to reports, including Katy Perry and The Chainsmokers at concerts in Sydney, and The Weeknd in Melbourne.

It has been reported that Wen intends to plead guilty and that he could face a fine of more than £1,000.

Ariana Grande and Cynthia Erivo at the London premiere for Wicked: For Good
Image:
Ariana Grande and Cynthia Erivo at the London premiere for Wicked: For Good

Ms Grande took a moment to gather herself in the aftermath of the intrusion, visibly shocked by the incident.

She didn’t address the incident on her own Instagram, but shared some photos with the caption “thank you, Singapore”, adding “we love you”.

The singer battled post-traumatic stress disorder after her 2017 concert in Manchester was bombed, leaving 22 people dead.

She told Vogue in 2018: “It’s hard to talk about because so many people have suffered such severe, tremendous loss. But, yeah, it’s a real thing.

“I know those families and my fans, and everyone there experienced a tremendous amount of it as well. Time is the biggest thing.

“I feel like I shouldn’t even be talking about my own experience – like I shouldn’t even say anything. I don’t think I’ll ever know how to talk about it and not cry.”

In the same interview she also addressed her own anxiety, saying she has “always” had it.

Ms Grande plays Galinda Upland in Wicked: For Good, the character who becomes Glinda the Good Witch. Ms Erivo plays Elphaba, the character who becomes the Wicked Witch of the West.

The film is released in UK cinemas on 21 November.

Continue Reading

Entertainment

A third of daily music uploads are AI-generated and 97% of people can’t tell the difference, says report

Published

on

By

A third of daily music uploads are AI-generated and 97% of people can't tell the difference, says report

Do you care if the music you’re listening to is artificially generated?

That question – once the realm of science fiction – is becoming increasingly urgent.

An AI-generated country track, Walk My Walk, is currently sitting at number one on the US Billboard chart of digital sales and a new report by streaming platform Deezer has revealed the sheer scale of AI production in the music industry.

Deezer’s AI-detection system found that around 50,000 fully AI-generated tracks are now uploaded every day, accounting for 34% of all daily uploads.

File pic: iStock
Image:
File pic: iStock

The true number is most likely higher, as Deezer’s AI-detection system does not catch every AI-generated track. Nor does this figure include partially AI-generated tracks.

In January 2025, Deezer’s system identified 10% of uploaded tracks as fully AI-generated.

Since then, the proportion of AI tracks – made using written prompts such as “country, 1990s style, male singer” – has more than tripled, leading the platform’s chief executive, Alexis Lanternier, to say that AI music is “flooding music streaming”.

More on Artificial Intelligence

‘Siphoning money from royalty pool’

What’s more, when Deezer surveyed 9,000 people in eight countries – the US, Canada, Brazil, UK, France, Netherlands, Germany and Japan – and asked them to detect whether three tracks were real or AI, 97% could not tell the difference.

That’s despite the fact that the motivation behind the surge of AI music is not in the least bit creative, according to Deezer. The company says that roughly 70% of fully AI-generated tracks are what it calls “fraudulent” – that is, designed purely to make money.

“The common denominator is the ambition to boost streams on specific tracks in order to siphon money from the royalty pool,” a Deezer spokesperson told Sky News.

“With AI-generated content, you can easily create massive amounts of tracks that can be used for this purpose.”

File pic: Reuters
Image:
File pic: Reuters


The tracks themselves are not actually fraudulent, Deezer says, but the behaviour around them is. Someone will upload an AI track then use an automated system – a bot – to listen to a song over and over again to make royalties from it.

Even though the total number of streams for each individual track is very low – Deezer estimates that together they account for 0.5% of all streams – the work needed to make an AI track is so tiny that the rewards justify the effort.

Are fully-AI tracks being removed?

Deezer is investing in AI-detection software and has filed two patents for systems that spot AI music. But it is not taking down the tracks it marks as fully-AI.

Instead it removes them from algorithmic recommendations and editorial playlists, a measure designed to stop the tracks getting streams and therefore generating royalties, and marks the tracks as “AI-generated content”.

“If people want to listen to an AI-generated track however, they can and we are not stopping them from doing so – we just want to make sure they are making a conscious decision,” the Deezer spokesperson says.

Read more from Sky News:
How Elon Musk is boosting the British right
The extraordinary impact of a crime on UK growth

Concerns about artists’ livelihoods

Deezer’s survey found that more than half (52%) of respondents felt uncomfortable with not being able to tell the difference between AI and human-made music.

“The survey results clearly show that people care about music and want to know if they’re listening to AI or human-made tracks or not,” said the company’s boss Alexis Lanternier.

“There’s also no doubt that there are concerns about how AI-generated music will affect the livelihood of artists.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Musicians protests AI copyright plans

Earlier this year, more than 1,000 musicians – including Annie Lennox, Damon Albarn and Kate Bush – released a silent album to protest plans by the UK government to let artificial intelligence companies use copyright-protected work without permission.

A recent study commissioned by the International Confederation of Societies of Authors and Composers suggested that generative AI music could be worth £146bn a year in 2028 and account for around 60% of music libraries’ revenues.

By this metric, the authors concluded, 25% of creators’ revenues are at risk by 2028, a sum of £3.5bn.

Continue Reading

Entertainment

BBC apologises to Donald Trump over editing of Panorama but says there isn’t ‘basis for defamation claim’

Published

on

By

BBC apologises to Donald Trump over editing of Panorama but says there isn't 'basis for defamation claim'

The BBC has apologised to Donald Trump over the editing of a speech in a Panorama programme in 2024.

The corporation said it was an “error of judgement” and the programme will “not be broadcast again in this form on any BBC platforms”.

But it added that it “strongly” disagrees that there is “a basis for a defamation claim”.

It emerged earlier, Donald Trump’s legal team said the US president had not yet filed a lawsuit against the BBC over the
broadcaster’s editing of a speech he made in 2021 on the day his supporters overran the Capitol building.

The legal team sent a letter over the weekend threatening to sue the media giant for $1bn and issuing three demands:

• Issue a “full and fair retraction” of the Panorama programme
• Apologise immediately
• “Appropriately compensate” the US president

On Sunday evening, two of the BBC’s top figures, including the director-general, resigned amid the edit and concerns about impartiality.

More from Ents & Arts

In a statement, the corporation said: “Lawyers for the BBC have written to President Trump’s legal team in response to a letter received on Sunday.

“BBC Chair Samir Shah has separately sent a personal letter to the White House making clear to President Trump that he and the Corporation are sorry for the edit of the President’s speech on 6 January 2021, which featured in the programme.

“The BBC has no plans to rebroadcast the documentary ‘Trump: A Second Chance?’ on any BBC platforms.

“While the BBC sincerely regrets the manner in which the video clip was edited, we strongly disagree there is a basis for a defamation claim.”

This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly.

Please refresh the page for the latest version.

You can receive breaking news alerts on a smartphone or tablet via the Sky News app. You can also follow us on WhatsApp and subscribe to our YouTube channel to keep up with the latest news

Continue Reading

Trending