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

Erin Brockovich: ‘My chiropractor saw mud on my stiletto – I said, I’ve been collecting dead frogs’

Published

on

By

Erin Brockovich: 'My chiropractor saw mud on my stiletto - I said, I've been collecting dead frogs'

Erin Brockovich says a chance conversation about a muddy stiletto with her chiropractor led to the making of the award-winning film about her life.

The climate activist, who was played by Julia Roberts in the movie, told Sky News: “My girlfriend, who was a chiropractor, was giving me a chiropractic adjustment and asked me why I had mud on my stilettos.

“I said, ‘Oh, I’ve been collecting dead frogs’. She goes, ‘What is wrong with you?’ So, I started telling her what I was doing.”

Then just a junior paralegal, Brockovich was in fact pulling together evidence that would see her emerge victorious from one of the largest cases of water contamination in US history in Hinkley, California.

Her hard work would see her win a record settlement from Pacific Gas & Electric Company – $333m (£254m) – but that was all still to come.

Little did Brockovich know, but her tale of a muddy stiletto would get back to actor Danny DeVito and his Jersey Films producing partner Michael Schamburg, and through them to the film’s director Steven Soderbergh.

Brockovich says Soderbergh was “wowed” by what he heard.

More on Climate Change

She says he realised her image “was something that Hollywood might be drawn to that I was never thinking of – the short skirt, the attitude, the big bust, the stilettos, the backcombed hair. Somehow, it came together.”

‘I was always going to be misunderstood’

Released in 2000, the powerful story of one woman’s fight for justice made Brockovich a household name, and the film won actress Julia Roberts an Oscar.

Now, 25 years on, Brockovich says she believes her legal victory was helped in part by an unlikely ally – her learning difficulty.

Julia Roberts and Russell Crowe pictured after winning Oscars for best actor and actress during the Oscars in 2001. Pic: AP/Richard Drew
Image:
Julia Roberts and Russell Crowe win best actress and actor at
the 2001 Oscars. Pic: AP/Richard Drew

Brockovich says: “Had I not been dyslexic, I might have missed Hinkley.”

Recently named a global ambassador for charity Made By Dyslexia, she’s been aware of her learning differences since childhood and still struggles today.

She says “moments of low self-esteem” still “creep back in”, and she long ago accepted “I was always going to be misunderstood”.

But for Brockovich, recognising her dyslexic strengths while working in Hinkley proved a pivotal moment: “My observations are wickedly keen. I feel like a human radar some days… Things you might not see as a pattern, I recognise. There are things that intuitively, I absolutely know.

“It will take me some time in my visual patterns of what I’m seeing, how to organise that. And it was in Hinkley that that moment happened for me because it was so omnipresent [and] in my face. Everything that should have been normal was not.”

‘A huge perfect storm’

Brockovich paints a bleak picture of what she saw in the small town: “The trees were secreting poison, the cows were covered in tumours, the chickens had wry neck [a neurological condition that causes the head to tilt abnormally], the people were sick and unbeknown to them, I knew they were all having the exact same health patterns. To the green water, to the two-headed frog, all of that was just I was like on fire, like electricity going, ‘Oh my gosh, what’s going on out here?'”

She describes it as “a huge, perfect storm that came together for me in Hinkley”.

But a side effect of the movie – overnight global fame – wasn’t always easy to deal with.

Pic. Made By Dyslexia
Image:
Pic. Made By Dyslexia

Brockovich calls it “scary,” admitting, “when the film first came out the night of the premiere, I was literally shaking so bad, I was so overwhelmed, that Universal Studios said, ‘If we can’t get you to calm down, I think we need to take you home’. It was a lot”.

Brockovich says she kept grounded by staying focused on her work, her family and her three children.

With Hollywood not always renowned for its faithful adherence to fact, Brockovich says the film didn’t whitewash the facts.

“I think they really did a good job at pointing out our environmental issues. Hollywood can do that, they can tell a good story. And I’m glad it was not about fluff and glamour. I’m glad it was about a subject that oftentimes we don’t want to talk about. Water pollution, environmental damage. People being poisoned.”

‘Defend ourselves against environmental assaults’

While environmental awareness is now part of the daily conversation in a way it wasn’t a quarter of a century ago, the battle to protect the climate is far from over.

Just last month, Donald Trump laid out plans to slash over 30 climate and environmental regulations as part of an ongoing effort to boost US industries from coal to manufacturing and ramp up oil and minerals production.

In response, Brockovich says, “We’re not going to stop it, but we can defend against these environmental assaults.

“We can do better with infrastructure. We can do better on a lot of policy-making. I think there’s a moment here. We have to do that because the old coming into the new isn’t working.

“I’ve recognised the patterns for 30-plus years, we just keep doing the same thing over and over and over and over again, expecting a different result.

“For me, sometimes it’s like, ‘Oh my gosh, just get your ego out of the way’. We have to accept that this might be something greater than us, but we can certainly defend ourselves and protect ourselves and prepare ourselves better so we can get through that storm.”

You can listen to Brockovich speaking about her dyslexia with Made By Dyslexia founder Kate Griggs on the first episode of the new season of the podcast Lessons In Dyslexic Thinking, wherever you get your podcasts.

Continue Reading

Entertainment

Menendez brothers’ resentencing hearing can go ahead next week, says judge

Published

on

By

Menendez brothers' resentencing hearing can go ahead next week, says judge

The Menendez brothers’ bid for freedom through resentencing can continue with the hearing scheduled for Thursday, a judge has ruled.

Lyle, 57, and Erik, 54, received life sentences without the possibility of parole after being convicted of murdering their parents, Jose and Kitty Menendez, at their Beverly Hills home in 1989.

Lyle was 21 at the time, Erik was 18.

Last year, Los Angeles district attorney George Gascon asked a judge to change the brothers’ sentence from life without the possibility of parole to 50 years to life. That would make them immediately eligible for parole because they committed the crime when they were younger than 26.

But Mr Gascon’s successor Nathan Hochman submitted a motion last month to withdraw the resentencing request, saying the brothers must fully acknowledge lies they told about the murder of their parents before he would support their release from prison.

Separately, Governor Gavin Newsom, who has the power to commute their sentences, has asked the parole board to consider whether the brothers would represent a public safety risk if released.

Anamaria Baralt, cousin of Erik and Lyle Menendez, hugs attorney Mark Geragos after a hearing in the brothers' case Friday, April 11, 2025, in Los Angeles. (AP Photo/Damian Dovarganes)
Image:
Anamaria Baralt, cousin of Erik and Lyle Menendez, hugs attorney Mark Geragos. Pic: AP

In light of Mr Hochman’s opposition, Los Angeles County Superior Court judge Michael Jesic ruled on Friday that the court can move forward with the hearing.

“Everything you argued today is absolutely fair game for the resentencing hearing next Thursday,” he said.

From prison, the brothers watched through a video link and could be seen in court seated next to each other in blue.

Speaking after the hearing, the brothers’ lawyer said: “Today is a good day. Justice won over politics.”

Prosecutors accused the brothers of killing their parents for a multimillion-dollar inheritance, although their defence team argued they acted out of self-defence after years of sexual abuse by their father.

A preliminary hearing held in Beverly Hills, Calif., for Lyle, left, and Erik Menendez, was postponed Friday as their lawyers fought to keep potentially incriminating evidence out of the case, April 12, 1991. Lyle, 23, and Eric, 20, are charged in the August 1989 shotgun murders of their parents, Jose and Kitty Menendez. (APP Photo/Kevork Djansezian)
Image:
The brothers were convicted in 1996 of first-degree murder. Pic: AP

The brothers have maintained their parents abused them since they were first charged with the murders.

A Netflix drama series and subsequent documentary about the brothers thrust them back into the spotlight last year, and led to renewed calls for their release – including from some members of their family.

Continue Reading

Entertainment

Ex-Abercrombie & Fitch chief executive Mike Jeffries ‘unfit to stand trial due to dementia’, prosecutors and defence team say

Published

on

By

Ex-Abercrombie & Fitch chief executive Mike Jeffries 'unfit to stand trial due to dementia', prosecutors and defence team say

Abercrombie & Fitch’s former chief executive is not fit to stand trial on sex trafficking charges as he is suffering from dementia, both prosecutors and his lawyers have said.

Mike Jeffries has Alzheimer’s disease, Lewy body dementia and the “residual effects of a traumatic brain injury”, his defence attorneys wrote in a letter filed at a federal court in Central Islip, New York.

The 80-year-old needs around-the-clock care, they added, citing evaluations by medical professionals.

Prosecutors and defence lawyers are calling for Jeffries to be placed in the custody of the federal bureau of prisons for up to four months. They say he should be admitted to hospital to have treatment that could allow his criminal case to proceed.

The business tycoon, who led fashion retailer A&F from 1992 to 2014, pleaded not guilty to federal sex trafficking and interstate prostitution charges in October, and was released on a $10m (£7.65m) bond.

A total of 15 men allege they were induced by “force, fraud and coercion” to engage in drug-fuelled sex parties.

Prosecutors have accused Jeffries, his partner Matthew Smith, and the couple’s alleged “recruiter” James Jacobson, of luring men to parties in New York City, the Hamptons and other locations, by dangling the prospect of modelling for A&F advertisements.

Smith and Jacobson have also pleaded not guilty to the charges against them.

‘Progressive and incurable’

In their latest letter on Jeffries’ health, his defence lawyers said at least four medical professionals had concluded his cognitive issues are “progressive and incurable”, and that he will not “regain his competency and cannot be restored to competency in the future”.

These issues “significantly impair” his ability to understand the charges against him, they wrote.

Matthew Smith leaves a federal courthouse in Central Islip, New York., on Tuesday, 3 December. Pic: AP Photo/Seth Wenig
Image:
Jeffries’ partner Matthew Smith, pictured outside the court in December, has also pleaded not guilty. Pic: AP

Read more from Sky News:
Tech executive and family die after helicopter crashes in New York
‘Wolf of Wall Street’ speaks to Sky News about Trump tariffs

“The progressive nature of his neurocognitive disorder ensures continued decline over time, further diminishing his already limited functional capacity,” said Dr Alexander Bardey, a forensic psychiatrist, and Dr Cheryl Paradis, a forensic psychologist, following evaluations made in December.

“It is, therefore, our professional opinion, within a reasonable degree of psychological and psychiatric certainty, that Mr Jeffries is not competent to proceed in the current case and cannot be restored to competency in the future.”

Jeffries left A&F in 2014 after leading the company for more than two decades, taking the retailer from a hunting and outdoor goods store founded in 1892 to a fixture of early 2000s fashion.

His lawyers did not immediately respond to requests by the Associated Press news agency for comment. The US attorney’s office for the eastern district of New York declined to comment.

Continue Reading

Trending