The Chevrolet Volt is a groundbreaking, technologically disruptive vehicle that defies old standard EPA labeling rules. Despite the fact that Volt prototypes have been running for well over a year, the EPA remains uncertain on how to label the car. Though we may all have our own ideas, the way the EPA chooses to construct the label, and what values it includes, may have a significant effect on consumer opinions and eventual purchase decisions.
The same holds true for Nissan’s plain battery electric car. Obviously in both cases the traditional highway/city mpg won’t do.
GM hopes the EPA can produce a label prior to launch, and EPA spokesperson Cathy Milbourne told the New York Times the label will appear “shortly.”
“Right now it looks like there’s going to be a lot on the label,” said GM vice president Tom Stephens. “They’re trying to figure out what are all the variables that customers are going to see out there.”
Recently the EPA announced it was considering changing the labels on all cars, but those won’t come into use until 2012 model year cars are available. The 2011 Volt needs a label now. The EPA’s Milbourne did confirm the EPA would still be using standard highway and city cycles to measure the Volt’s performance. This includes a battery of five tests that sum to 43.9 miles.
To be accurate the EPA must include battery efficiency, charge-sustaining fuel efficiency, and expected gas and electric use over time. Other considerations are expected fuel cost and even miles per gallon equivalents of fuel plus electricity.
“There are going to be new and unique numbers to classify the new and unique behavior of this car,” said Volt powertrain chief engineer Pam Fletcher. “We need to talk about electricity usage and we need to talk about gasoline usage and we need to figure out the best way to do that.”
Fletcher conceded, as most media test drives have confirmed, the Volt will get “some kind of combined fuel economy that’s in the mid- to upper 30s,” in charge-sustaining mode.
Though the label is still forthcoming, the EPA has apparently already decided on some level how they will classify the car. Their website lists the Volt as a “plug-in hybrid” and the LEAF as an “electric car.”
Source (New York Times)
+9
Oct 19th, 2010 (6:23 am)I’d like to see them list kwh per mile
+5
Oct 19th, 2010 (6:28 am)This should be pretty embarrassing for the EPA. They should have had a draft plan to address EV’s and strong hybrids years ago. The fact that they still don’t have a label out shows that they must have started working on this fairly recently.
Despite the delay, the new label is looking pretty good. I just hope they stay away from letter grades. We need numbers!
+9
Oct 19th, 2010 (6:29 am)So it has taken them about two years to decide what anyone here would have been able to tell them in less than five minutes – That the Leaf is an electric car, and the Volt is a plug in hybrid….
The government NEVER ceases to amaze me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Oct 19th, 2010 (6:32 am)kWh/mile is dependent on a lot of variables…The same variables that make the Volts range anywhere between 25-50 miles. There is no fixed kWh/mile rating for any vehicle. It would have to be an average, derived from one of the EPA drive cycles.
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (6:32 am)Timely topic, Lyle! I can’t resist commenting on the prognosticated label you show:
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (6:33 am)An average driver will typically get a little less mpg than is listed on the EPA label. On this basis the label for the Volt should read:
40mpg (liquid fuel/regen assist)
250mpg (lithium electric/40 mile cycle/4 hours 240V)
Seems next to impossible to determine a combined mpg. Being that the Volt only needs to use 9 gallons of fuel per year for lubrication. This is a best of 1290mpg. And is very doable.
=D-Volt
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (6:39 am)I still think they should go for a huge mpg at first, to accentuate the difference from ordinary ICE and hybrid cars. After there are more battery cars, the KWH stuff will be more appreciated.
Oct 19th, 2010 (6:40 am)“Charge takes: 4 hours”
At what voltage? (Even more critical with other/future vehicles with different high voltage fast charge systems)
…and there should be an “up to” in front of the 4. If battery is just half-empty it just takes 2 hours…
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (6:43 am)(continued from my post #5. Sorry, the edit function timed out for me)….
Timely topic, Lyle! I can’t resist commenting on the prognosticated label you show above: The number for MPGequivalent, 98, immediately reminds me of a serious discussion I had with my daughter, who had just been awarded her Master’s degree in mathematics from a major university. She was devastated that in all her undergrad courses as well as her Master’s courses, she had straight 100s —except for one that was in the high 90s. The result was her GPA was “only” 99.7 and she was not at all happy about it. My advice was to not let it bother her, simply give it as 99.7 in her resume without rounding it up (or down). Result? EVERY ONE OF HER INTERVIEWERS REMEMBERED HER GPA! Some said things like, “Oh, too bad, you only got a GPA=99.7!”
Hey, maybe GM will get lucky and wind up with a MPGequiv just a tad less than 100!!!
+2
Oct 19th, 2010 (6:55 am)Assuming the mpg equivalent is based on converting avg. national Kwh price to gasoline price, I think the sticker above says it all.
Drive electric, you’ll get X. Drive CS and you’ll get Y.
Doesn’t seem so hard.
-31
Oct 19th, 2010 (7:00 am)(click to show comment)
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (7:06 am)As our resident “media mogul”, your thoughts carry lots of weight, at least as far as I’m concerned, bt! I also like the label Lyle shows above & hope the EPA uses it, or at least something close to it —and doesn’t screw it up!
+7
Oct 19th, 2010 (7:09 am)The Volt’s gas-only mpg is surprisingly high considering that it’s a mid-size car (vs. the Cruze) and lugging around a battery pack.
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (7:11 am)Gee, I wonder if they will make it public before Nov 11?
+6
Oct 19th, 2010 (7:14 am)No matter what the EPA does with this, people will complain. If the efficiency appears too high, trolls will complain. If it appears too low, fans will complain.
Other than the calculation for CAFE, these numbers are pretty much meaningless for consumers because they know that the EPA number is not ‘real’.
EPA needs to revamp the whole effort (which it looks like they are doing for 2012). This could take some time as there may need to be some legislation changed (such as the aforementioned CAFE calculation).
Having MPGe is totally bogus imho. If you’re going to do a conversion anyway, do it in KWh. Make the numbers small and make the ‘cost per year’ number huge like on an appliance sticker.
The funny thing is that if they use a 43.9 mile test, it’ll probably never go into CS mode!
+2
Oct 19th, 2010 (7:18 am)The problem is in measuring our efficiency in miles per gallon. (MPG)
We need to get rid of the MPG standard altogether, for all our cars, and adopt the Gallons per 100 Miles standard, (G/100M) similar to what is done in Europe. If we don’t, there is no way to compare between cars like the Volt, Vs. Prius Vs. a TDI, all of which have their benefits for a particular user.
If we adopted the G/100M it would be easy to have a G/100M city and G/100m highway, with the first 40 miles being electric. They could then add a standard about the electric range.
-12
Oct 19th, 2010 (7:21 am)(click to show comment)
+39
Oct 19th, 2010 (7:22 am)So a car company can design, build and test a vehicle quicker than our govt can figure out how to label it? Oh please let’s have the govt take over even more of our lives…
That last part was sarcasm just in case you didn’t pick that up!
+3
Oct 19th, 2010 (7:22 am)From the very earliest concept, the Volt has always included a gasoline engine. THEREFORE, only a fool would have assumed that it could be classified in the same category as a a full BEV like the Leaf.
The Cruze uses an engine from the “family zero” engine family (like the Volt)…however, they are optimized differently. The Volt’s engine is tuned for torque, which is not necessarily the most efficient tune as far as pumping losses go.
The Cruze LS (normally aspirated) is only rated at 22 mpg City and 35 mpg HWY…which suggests that mid 30′s mpg for the Volt is actually pretty darn good.
The Cruze Eco is rated at 40 mpg HWY, but it is turbocharged, which increases it’s efficiency over the other two engine configurations mentioned above….hence 40 mpg vs. 35 mpg for the LS model.
It’s also important to remember that the Cruze has the added benefit of sending all the engine power/torque through a very efficient 6 speed transmission, possibly allowing the Cruze to cruise (pun intended) at a lower rpm and with a more efficient torque path to the wheels.
+3
Oct 19th, 2010 (7:46 am)Off topic, but my AFI (black/black) order for the Volt moved to status 2000 today. Woot!
Lyle: Does your label image imply that the EPA will, in fact, label the car as a “Plug in Hybrid” and not an “Extended Range” EV?
join thE REVolution
+6
Oct 19th, 2010 (7:49 am)How about “250 smiles per gallon”
+2
Oct 19th, 2010 (7:57 am)There are lots of different ways to connecting an electric motor and an ICE in a car. From my perspective, it doesn’t matter how you connect them. If you have both and electric motor and and ICE. the car is a hybrid. If you have only an electric motor it is an electric car and if you have only an ICE it is an ICE car.
The Volt is a unique type of hybrid in that you can remove the ICE and still get the full performance of the car for the first 40 miles or so. If you were to do so, it would then becomes an electric car. You will still need to keep the generator because it is used to move the car.
+3
Oct 19th, 2010 (7:58 am)FYI – Below is to demonstrate why daytime charging is more important to the Volt than the Leaf.
Below is typical week of driving for me (last week) that included Thursday working from home and a saturday family trip (where midpoint the car sat in public parking lot for 7 hours). First set of numbers shows AER with only charging over night (220 AER miles, 187 w/gas), second set shows what could be achieved with charging in a parking lot (372 AER miles, 35 w/gas).
Tot AER GAS
MON 56 40 16
TUE 85 40 45
WED 56 40 16
THU 10 10 0
FRI 80 40 40
SAT 110 40 70
SUN 10 10 0
————
407 220 187
Tot AER GAS
MON 56 56 0
TUE 85 80 5
WED 56 56 0
THU 10 10 0
FRI 80 80 0
SAT 110 80 30
SUN 10 10 0
————
407 372 35
If I would have used the Leaf for all my driving last week I would have had to stop on saturday for a 10 minute boost at currently non-existent (but will be there in a couple years) high speed charging station.
+3
Oct 19th, 2010 (8:03 am)This also shows the amazing engineering decision making ability of the volt team to be able to design and build this complete system and the EPA cant come up with a window sticker.
Tom
+5
Oct 19th, 2010 (8:10 am)When will the EPA understand that they cannot determine an indeterminate equation. There is no single solution that makes sense in this scenario, except for a very small minority of buyers. The AER + CS mode scenario is more complex by nature and there is no way around this. Just give us the straight numbers: miles/KWh city, miles/kwh hwy, CS mpg city, CS mpg hwy.
They can play whatever games and do whatever rediculous equivalents they want to but, if so, give to real numbers too. Also, if they truly want to simplify the situation for the average consumer make a chart (ave daily drive on the left axis, ave annual miles on the top, total annual kwh / gallons of gas in the cells). Electricity rates vary too greatly ($0.04 – $0.45) to effectively use equivalents.
+2
Oct 19th, 2010 (8:11 am)Just curious how you would label the Plug In Prius?
Oct 19th, 2010 (8:15 am)I say go for the triple digits, why not
+4
Oct 19th, 2010 (8:16 am)It’s interesting that Pam Fletcher mentioned in the New York Times article that it takes seven days to test a VOLT compared with two days for a “typical vehicle.” The need to “capture ratings with the battery in various states of charge” shows how unique the VOLT is compared with other vehicles.
The ability to drive with hardly any gas at all will revolutionize the actual MPG VOLT owners will experience. That should provide some exciting conversations when asked, “How do you like your VOLT?”
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (8:16 am)Turbo does not increase the efficiency of the same engine, actually the opposite is accurate. Turbo augments the total power allowing a smaller engine to suffice where a larger engine would otherwise be needed. (e.g. GM was originally considering a 1.0L 3-cylinder turbo for the Volt before going to the 1.4L 4-cyl engine).
Oct 19th, 2010 (8:19 am)Is the picture of the label at the top supposed to be for a Volt or just a generic PHV?
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (8:21 am)A new yardstick is going to have to be developed. Probably based on the scientific measures of energy. That is the only way to have a level comparison of economy. With the radical differences in efficiency between electric, petroleum and hydrogen fuel cell drives you can’t go by a simple MPG rating any longer. And with cars that run on more then 1 energy source with variable amounts of interaction how do you set a real descriptive MPG? I know people that are totally ticked off that MPG gains are handed to electricity without giving electricity credit.
I personally believe that the well to wheels energy consumption should be used for a truly fair comparison. That gallon of gas took over 19 kWh of electricity to refine (ignoring transportation costs). A EV can go 80 miles on that amount of electricity. And a HFC car can go 20 miles on that same amount of electricity. Who’s the true efficiency leader here?
+2
Oct 19th, 2010 (8:22 am)I sure hope that “30 miles before switching to Gas Mode” (aka 30 miles all electric) ends up being 40+ on the sticker.
+9
Oct 19th, 2010 (8:27 am)I think MPGe is a joke. Why don’t we just say the Volt gets 507 rods per hogs head? It would equally confuse the customer.
+2
Oct 19th, 2010 (8:31 am)Could just use $. If you go X miles in this car it will cost your Y dollars. Even graph it for us that are more visually oriented. Then people can see how much money they are going to spend driving this car. Use the national average rate for electricity & gas at the time the car is released.
I think this would be a good aid for many. However I would still want more info (engineer in me wants all the data).
-25
Oct 19th, 2010 (8:36 am)(click to show comment)
+4
Oct 19th, 2010 (8:37 am)LOL Shocking this government is slow and unsure what to do. Schocking!
LOL
+7
Oct 19th, 2010 (8:54 am)Lol. You should use ‘Conspiracy Theorist’ as your screen name.
Which EV did you design, Engineer?
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (8:55 am)Pretty simple:
Electric: miles/kWh, city/hwy, allows comparison to Leaf and other electrics
Gas: miles/gal, city/hwy, allows comparison to similar size gas cars
If you wanted to confuse people after that you could give a bar chart giving the various typical driving distances per day and what % of the population drive them. Fill in the electric part of the bar with green and the gas part with black. Put 2 numbers at the tips of the bars for kWh and gal gas used.
You have to have imagination since I am not as handy as some here producing a graphic.
-Book
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (8:55 am)Turbo charging a given displacement does increase efficiency (output work for input fuel) but decreases economy.
So a 1.4 NA uses less fuel than a 1.4T (say 10%), but the 1.4T will output more power (say 15%)
So a 1.0T could output the same power as a 1.4NA, but using less fuel.
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (9:00 am)If the EPA can’t figure out what to do when they knew 3 years ago the car was coming, then they ain’t gonna figure it out in 6 weeks.
My guess is the car will ship without an EPA label, which is fine with me. An EPA label is very much like a promise from a politician. You the (voter or consumer), are hopeful, but deep down you know it’s a lie.
Big pickups over 8800 GVWR don’t have them so they won’t be setting some presidence.
Oct 19th, 2010 (9:00 am)Do they really NEED a fuel economy label? I thought that heavy-duty trucks (such as the F-350, Ram Heavy Duty or GM’s Heavy Duty pickup trucks) don’t have fuel economy labels because of some outdated laws not requiring fuel economy figures to be posted on the stickers of vehicles greater than a certain weight?
Or maybe that’s all been changed in the last few years…
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (9:02 am)I agree with kdawg. Just give a $ amount to compare cars.
The EPA should not be in the business of generating consumer-oriented analysis in the first place. Do the scientific analysis and publish it.
Let a consumer agency of the government handle analysis for what is mostly a financial decision. Maybe the new credit-card/consumer-advocacy group would be a better choice (don’t remember their official agency name).
Oct 19th, 2010 (9:07 am)Thinking about a future where all cars are EV’s or EREV’s, one way to distinguish amongst them is the efficiency of power usage of the cars common components. For example if you compare the Leaf and Volt for a 1 hour EV drive on the same course driving at the same speed, using wipers, lights, radio, NAV, and HVAC. Which has the most battery power percent remaining after t 1 hour?
What use is having a large battery if on a dark cold rainy night I’ll deplete the battery by 60% in 1 hour?
When it comes to EV ratings, time to depletion may be just as important to distance traveled.
NPNS!
Oct 19th, 2010 (9:12 am)Wrong. The primary benefit of the turbocharger is that it eliminates pumping losses associated with a normally aspirated motor (INCREASING THE ENGINES EFFICIENCY). This is how a turbo “augments” the total power…if you want to use layman’s terms.
These benefits outweigh increase back-pressure of the exhaust system, increased intake air temperatures, etc.
If you need a quick refresher, read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four-stroke_engine
paying special attention to the sections titled “Power Output Limit” and “Turbocharging”
+7
Oct 19th, 2010 (9:12 am)We all know that the first 35-50 miles are going to be all electric. Just take the Volt out on the same test track that every other car is tested on and tell us what the MPG you achieve while the engine is running (City and Highway). Then have 2 sets of numbers ….. What the average person will pay in electric per mile and what the MPG the Volt gets in CS mode.
It is not rocket science …… gheesh!! (no offence NASAMAN)
Oct 19th, 2010 (9:20 am)The problem might seem trivial but it’s not. First, you have a unit mesuring a liquid fuel (the gallon) that don’t apply at all to what is now the source of energy (electricity) for a part of the performance of the car. Second, you must come up with a label that even the most uninformed person will be able to compare to other EPA car labels. Third, to avoid any accusation of bias, the label must not seem to favor one manufacturer over another. Fourth, profoundly changing the unit of measurement is out of question – gallons per 100 miles, I believe, would not be well received by conservatists. And it’s still gallons that don’t really apply to electricity. Fifth, any revolution in labeling is likely to be ill-received : it has to be an evolution that can apply to all manufacturers and provide a fair basis of comparison.
A company that would be responsible for a label of this sort would simply write the label to favor its products. A government agency cannot do that.
Not that easy.
Oct 19th, 2010 (9:35 am)Interesting. While the charging stations infrastructure will provide a much greater range for the Leaf, it allows the Volt to be more of an electric car without having to worry about the range at any time. Didn’t realize it before.
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (9:39 am)Tall Pete is correct.
I think we would all be embarrassed with the number of Americans who don’t know how to read a simple graph or calculate mpg.
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (9:42 am)Actually, there might be. What about the percentile rank ? The EPA would establish its cycle, gather the results, evaluate the overall energy consumption and rank the car accordingly with a value between 1 to 100.
Everybody understands that if the car is in the 90th percentile, its fuel economy is better than if the rank is 85 or 65.
Better than a letter. Clearer also.
+6
Oct 19th, 2010 (9:46 am)I can’t wait until I can order my own Volt. I have never really cared about my car. This will be the first time in my life that I will be excited to buy a new car. It would be great to have a car with MPG of over 90.
Oct 19th, 2010 (9:46 am)The Volts engine runs at wide open throttle at all rpm settings (even at the 1500rpm “idle”, yes it runs WOT at idle), with zero manifold vacuum.. just like a diesel. Thus no pumping losses. A turbo would not increase the mpg of a Volt.
+3
Oct 19th, 2010 (9:56 am)I made my own label and sent it to the EPA:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/28444753@N03/4944785465/
+3
Oct 19th, 2010 (9:56 am)Doesn’t work. Gas prices are too volatile. Electricity prices are more stable. What if the middle east decide to lower production all of a sudden ?
Worse yet. The same car would get a different label in the course of the same year according to the current price of oil. How often do we make the update of the prices ? In between updates, how informative would such a label really be ?
Such a label would be misleading the customer, IMHO.
+2
Oct 19th, 2010 (9:58 am)That’s exactly why they take so long to come up with a label. They must have a label that avoid such accusations.
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (10:01 am)Simple solution:
———————————————————————————
Mileage range depending on driving style and conditions:
1. Electric Range: 32 to 52 miles (Until battery is depleted)
Then:
2. Gasoline Use: 35 to 48 miles per gallon
Combined miles per gallon can range from 38 mpg to 350+ mpg.
———————————————————————————-
(I don’t know the real numbers that would result from controlled tests.
These are just here for example.)
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (10:04 am)I’ll go with what MT said about WOT operation…
One the second point, you’re just wrong. Even in un-throttled condition a normally aspirated engine is still subject to pumping losses associated with the intake runners, intake valve ports, combustion chamber design, valve timing, etc, etc, etc…..The engine is still trying to suck the air in and there is still negative relative pressure within the combustion chamber.
The zero manifold vacuum you’re referring to is actually relative pressure (0 psi, relative). Absolute pressure within the manifold is 14.7 psi. With a turbo you might be running 30 psi absolute pressure (15 psi relative)…WHICH INCREASES THE EFFICIENCY.
A turbo would increase the efficiency of the Volt, as long as the turbo was operating at a positive manifold pressure (creating boost). The scenario is dependent on engine load, however….so at low loads, the turbo may or may not be creating positive pressure and in those instances would be slightly less efficient than an optimized n/a engine. At higher loads, when the turbo is “spooling” it would be more efficient.
Granted, if the Volt ICE only needs to output 85 hp, then a 1.4L turbo would probably be overkill (though not on an SS model, as the extra power could be blended into the EVT or dumped to a larger generator).
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (10:06 am)I like that idea (its sort of already in the 1-10 Fuel Economy and Greenhouse Gas rating shown above). I think it would be a good aid for many, however I still want the other data too. Another question is what distance do you use to determine the efficiency? 43.9 miles? Do you always assume starting from a full charge? So many variables… so many different results… That’s why I like graphs.
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (10:06 am)The current label is by far much better than those supplied to us a couple of topics before. Both numbers clearly state the efficiency in terms of MPG, and for each CD and CS-mode.
However, since the EPA states “Fuel Economy and Environmental Comparison”, I see no reason to add the charge time and EV range of the vehicle. These informations have nothing to do in the scope of the label. They belong, imo, to the car sticker (marketing sticker).
Additionally, I see an important information missing: the vehicle charging efficiency. Something like a ratio [0;...;1], the smallest the worst. This number could be computed as (KW effectively stored in the battery) / (total KW required to charge it)). The loss generated from the charging process muss be integrated in the annual Fuel Cost economy calculation.
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (10:08 am)Still think they should drop the MPG equivalent idea. I’m guessing the main issue is to get useful numbers takes too much test time and they’re looking for a shortcut.
-4
Oct 19th, 2010 (10:10 am)“Their website lists the Volt as a “plug-in hybrid” and the LEAF as an “electric car.”
Yes the days of saying it was an electric car because the ICE never drove the wheels are over. It is like a Prius with less seats, a far bigger battery, and an AER around 40 miles. It is faster than the current Prius, but its highway CS mode mileage appears to be about 25% less than the Prius.
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (10:11 am)Yeah, its volatile.. but that’s why i said use the national average in Jan of that year. For 2010, i would use say $3/gal and 13cents/kwh. Gas may go to $3.20gal.. or it may only be $2.60 in Alabama, but it would serve as a good way to compare vehicles w/out having to figure out what energy source you are using. Again, this is just an aid. It would have lots of disclaimers. But it would help people who are not very math oriented do a comparison.
+2
Oct 19th, 2010 (10:15 am)The Volt obviously is a plug-in hybrid. However, it is a bit of a disservice to lump it in with possibly weaker plug-ins. The Volt has as strong an electric component as possible since it can run fully on grid provided electric power until the battery runs down after 25 to 50 miles. Weak plug in hybrids may simply blend in the electric power with the ICE, having little or no distinct fully electric range. How do you label that? The upcoming Prius plug-in will be reasonably strong but still might need footnotes on the “miles before switching to Gas Mode” section indicating limitations on speed and acceleration to stay in electric mode.
I’d say the Volt deserves to be in an Extended Range Electric Vehicle category as a subset of Plug-in Hybrid Electric. It has a distinct (if nearly unnoticeable) transition from electric only mode to gas powered mode. Once in “Gas Mode” it makes little difference to me how the ICE applies its power. Whether it’s driving a generator, directly connected to the wheels, or running a prop like an air boat, the only important thing at that point is MPG.
+4
Oct 19th, 2010 (10:17 am)Are we really gonna do this again today? ughh
Oct 19th, 2010 (10:19 am)I can remember a time when a government – not this one – was fast to conclude that a country had to be attacked. That government came up with unsubstantiated threats of weapons of mass destruction to justify its fast action.
Fast is not always good.
Oct 19th, 2010 (10:21 am)Seems to me they should just have MPC (miles per charge) City/Highway/Combined and MPG City/High/Combined. I think trying to figure out some overall MPG when combined with the electric operation doesn’t make sense. No one thinks that way. People say “OK, I’ve got 20 miles of battery left and about 5 gallons in the tank.”
If they come up with a really high MPG number it will be meaningless. People might say “hey, I get 100 MPG, got 3 gallons left, I can go 300 miles!” which, of course, isn’t true. It’s important that people have an accurate CS mode figure so I know how far I can really go when I’ve got 3 gallons left. I know the car will tell me, but I always like doing the math myself.
Oct 19th, 2010 (10:22 am)The FIAT Multiair engines do the same thing , no throttles and they run on gasoline.
Oct 19th, 2010 (10:23 am)+1. Yeah, MPGe answers the Q: How many oranges would you eat if you ate two apples?
Actually he designed the Volt. At the ride and drive you can identify him by the aluminum foil on his head.
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (10:28 am)I don’t care how the label it. With my driving patterns I should get over 500 MPG easy. It will be pleasure to burn only 1 tank of fuel every 9 months or so.
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (10:28 am)EPA has so many different goals here, the primary one being CAFE. But CAFE doesn’t really have anything to do with energy policy. It would probably make more sense to have DOE handle the consumer sticker. It does a good job with the EnergyStar labels.
+2
Oct 19th, 2010 (10:29 am)If you look at current battery advertising you’ll see they emphasize long lasting. Duracell vs. Energizer which will last longer just sitting in a flash light. I wonder if that kind of comparison will take place with EV’s. If I drove a Leaf to work on a cold winter’s day what percentage of battery power would I have after it was sitting there unplugged for 8 hours vs. a Ford Focus EV? Even cell phones make that comparison. Which cell phone would you prefer, the one that has an idle charge time of 5 days or 3? The rules have changed the EPA has a lot to think about.
NPNS!
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (10:29 am)Wait until they get the plug in Prius. Trying to classify that will be a pain since it has some all electric range, but it also uses the gas engine for going over 62 mph, but still probably not as much as it uses when the battery is depleted. That’s gonna be a nightmare for the EPA who have taken 2 years to figure out how to classify the Volt which is much simpler as its either in electric only mode or gas only mode.
Then you’ve got cars like the BMW concept that is infinitely variable between gas and electricity depending on acceleration demands.
I think all of these factors are tripping up the EPA to find a standard system that any vehicle can use so they’re not constantly having to scratch and revise their whole system every year or two.
-2
Oct 19th, 2010 (10:30 am)Sorry Kdawg, I’m still in the denial stage..
The part that stuck with me from this article is that Pam Fletcher, a GM powertrain engineer “conceded, as most media test drives have confirmed, the Volt will get “some kind of combined fuel economy that’s in the mid- to upper 30s,” in charge-sustaining mode.”
It would be more palatable if GM increased the AER over 50 miles of range.
Oct 19th, 2010 (10:33 am)I would hope that all the figures in the electric section of the label represent electricity from the wall and would thus include the charging inefficiency. A separate measurement of charging efficiency is unnecessary and probably difficult to obtain. I doubt they can easily measure the electricity actually delivered from the battery to the motor and trusting the car’s computer for the figures would be naive. The only wrinkle would be that there will probably be different efficiencies for charging the car depending on voltage (120, 240, or 400). Should they calculate based on best case or worst case if the consumer has a choice?
-10
Oct 19th, 2010 (10:38 am)(click to show comment)
Oct 19th, 2010 (10:44 am)All of the EPA estimates assume certain driving patterns. OK. Suppose there are two driving patterns. 1) Primarily City and 2) Primarily Highway.
12,000 miles Primarily City: 123 Gallons, 321KWH
12,000 miles Primarily Country: 234 Gallons, 221KWH
+9
Oct 19th, 2010 (10:46 am)DO NOT BLEND MPG WITH AER!
DO NOT BLEND MPG WITH AER!
DO NOT BLEND MPG WITH AER!
DO NOT BLEND MPG WITH AER!
:0)
EPA should read like this..
PHV PRIUS:
EV Range: Up to 13 Miles Per Full Charge
EV MPH: Up to 60mph
Hybrid Mode: 48/50 MPG
Chevy Volt:
EV Range: Up to 40 Miles Per Full Charge
EV MPH: Up to 100mph
Hybrid Mode: 40/50 MPG
LEAF:
EV Range: Up to 100 Miles Per Full Charge
EV MPH: Up to 90mph
Hybrid Mode: N/A
All depending on driver and driving conditions.
DO NOT BLEND MPG WITH AER!
DO NOT BLEND MPG WITH AER!
DO NOT BLEND MPG WITH AER!
DO NOT BLEND MPG WITH AER!
-11
Oct 19th, 2010 (10:52 am)(click to show comment)
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (10:53 am)If the EPA’s Volt label looks complicated it becomes one more thing that might turn buyers away.
-11
Oct 19th, 2010 (10:55 am)(click to show comment)
Oct 19th, 2010 (10:55 am)Agreed. MPGe is a way to normalize all the energy content values for whatever type of fuel you’re using. Otherwise, you’ll have to break it down to kWh/mile…even for liquid fuels, and I think that would confuse even more people. Most of us a science or engineering background would be fine, but what about the rest of the country?
+2
Oct 19th, 2010 (10:57 am)The Volt is two cars in one. It suffers the drawback of carrying the weight of 2 significant drive paths. Individually, the Volt doesn’t compare so well to lighter vehicles. But together, there are efficiencies that can be measured graphically. The consumer (and, lol, the salesman) is going to have to be a little more educated in understanding the combined performance variables.
Electric vehicles can be measured as
AER range and kw/mile
Hybrid (self sustaining) mileage is ok as it is now
MPG per current standard
EREV or PHEV driven miles energy usage of kw and gallons of gas is best shown by the way we drive
5 ranges of mileage efficiency 25, 50, 100, 200, 400.
or graphically mapped from 0 to 500 miles.
There’s no easy way around it but the measure must be absolute. If current cost variables are used as a comparison, then, well, good luck with that. Annual energy costs are totally dependent on how often the driver plugs in.
The politics must be driving PHEV manufacturers and the EPA nuts.
The Volt isn’t going to look good in either of the top two categories. I’m betting that a label that highlights these two is just what GM is trying to prevent.
The Volt will statistically shine in everyday driving, miles driven being the measure of overall fuel and electricity cost. Overall energy consumption will not be better than an EV but will most certainly stand head and foot over any type of hybrid we know will be on the road within the next few years.
-8
Oct 19th, 2010 (10:57 am)Partly because the Cruze is a lot lighter. If the Volt routinely does double-conversion (KE to electricity to KE), that’s another factor (and that’s why the Volt doesn’t *always* do double-conversion).
+3
Oct 19th, 2010 (11:00 am)Idk. I’m still a big Volt fan, but honestly I’m very disappointed by the “low” CS mpg figures. Given all the hype about every component (all the way down to the sound system) on the Volt being geared for efficiency, as well as supposedly superior aerodynamics, I was really expecting a CS mpg to be on par with, or better than, the Prius. The Prius is about 19% lighter, but certainly that can’t account for a 21%-28% difference in mpg.
I wonder how much CS efficiency was sacrificed in an effort to make the car feel more “normal” by having engine RPM tied rather closely to instantaneous power draw? i.e., having the engine running at a constant near-ideal RPM rather than revving up and down with driver action. But I guess that’s unavoidable. No one wants to be coasting or sitting at a stop light with the engine running the same as during acceleration.
Hopefully GM can pick a better engine for Gen2 that’s better suited to maximizing CS mpg.
+3
Oct 19th, 2010 (11:00 am)In the image above, I object to the “Gas Only” label.
This tells me I will be using gas 100% of the time after CD mode and in CS mode. That is not how the Volt works. Unless GM has made changes, I understand the Volt will “Dip into” the batt pack when needed like hard accel or passing or uphill.
It should be labeled “Hybrid mode” because it is electrically assisted when needed.
/anyway, that’s my thought.
//back to my coffee…..(no Kahlua)
-12
Oct 19th, 2010 (11:05 am)(click to show comment)
+2
Oct 19th, 2010 (11:07 am)I’m a “less government is better” type of guy. This is just the latest example that has helped to shape my stance.
+7
Oct 19th, 2010 (11:23 am)Charlie H,
The truth has come out. The Volt is a better design. Thanks for pointing that out.
Oct 19th, 2010 (11:28 am)As a driver and engineer, I agree with you. The cost per mile is a much better value than miles per gallon, especially where the U.S. gallon in not the standard volume measurement. Here in Puerto Rico, gasoline is sold in liters and most car owners don’t even try to calculated miles per liter (or even KM per liter as in Europe).
Raymond
-3
Oct 19th, 2010 (11:29 am)Trouble there is that if you look at the electric part and compare to a Leaf, the Leaf wins. If you compare the petrol part to the Prius, the Prius wins. Not exactly good marketing, or neccesarily correct…
+2
Oct 19th, 2010 (11:32 am)A turbocharger on Volt’s 1.4L would increase the GPM (Grins Per Mile), when wanted, without affecting the MPG, while hypermiling. Thanks to the transmission like no other.
Oct 19th, 2010 (11:33 am).
Excellent suggestion. Moreover, it builds on the cost estimates on present EPA stickers, so it is within the tradition. Sure, prices are volatile, but if one uses the price as of Jan 1 or July 1 of each year it is a good starting point and the comparisons are stable and meaningful for those prices.
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (11:36 am)Regarding your comment, the quote below is from the Volt review at Cars.com. He’s talking about driving the Volt in CS mode. I thought it was interesting as I’ve heard differently from different people on this.
“When you come to a stop, or even occasionally when you coast, the engine turns off again.”
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (11:39 am)You’re right CJ. It should be hybrid mode. Heck, the engine may even be completely off at times during CS mode. “Gas Only” is misleading.
-7
Oct 19th, 2010 (11:44 am)They did, in the ‘EV’ area of the label. The label shown has 34 kwh/100 miles. I hope you are not having a problem with moving the decimal ?
Oct 19th, 2010 (11:45 am)# 78 srschrier Said:
If the EPA’s Volt label looks complicated it becomes one more thing that might turn buyers away. srschrier
XXXMPG would sure get buyer’s attention. And wouldn’t be as misleading as most stickers are on other cars.
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (11:48 am)DonC,
Yes, that may be the solution. Classify the Volt as a mobile appliance and use the Energy Star rating. It will show how much energy and money the buyer will save in comparison with other brands.
Raymond
-15
Oct 19th, 2010 (11:53 am)(click to show comment)
-14
Oct 19th, 2010 (11:55 am)(click to show comment)
+3
Oct 19th, 2010 (11:57 am)#1 – There’s no software change that would make the Volt run like Prius. The Prius is a gas car w/electric assist. The Volt requires electricity to move as it is a true EV. It cannot move by just the ICE. They are much more different than you suggest.
#2 yes
#3 yes
#4 Battery conditioning
#5 Battery chemistry
#6 Performance
Oct 19th, 2010 (11:59 am)If most car drivers can operate a computer and other electronic gadgets with ease, they should be keen enough to understand energy measurements as watts and joules. We need to educate them. More EVs are on the way and without knowing what are the real savings, adapting to electrical power will be a stumbling block, and everyone will lose.
I recommend using our newspapers, our local news programs, and many publcations (my best is Popular Science and Popular Mechanics) to train how to evaluate the modern transportation vehicles in correct energy units and range, not in liquid volumes.
I hope that Motor Trend will do the correct explanation of how they evaluate all the new EVs coming this year in their annual January Auto Issue, and finally choose an EV (the Chevy Volt, of course!) as the 2011 Car of the Year.
Raymond
+3
Oct 19th, 2010 (12:02 pm)I agree! In fact, I would guess that on an average trip in CS/ER mode ONLY, if one could measure the total amount of power drawn from the battery (as well as the total number of times the Volt “Dips into” the batt pack —i.e., after every stop up to 20mph, as well as when passing, when accelerating hard or when driving uphill) we would find nearly HALF of all power in the CS/ER mode is supplied by the battery, just as with an ordinary hybrid! How do I know? Because that’s how the Volt is designed to operate —the gas engine & generator are sized to supply only HALF of the power needed to propel the Volt in CS/ER mode!!! So yes, “Gas only” on the EPA label is not only misleading, it’s simply WRONG technically!*
/*I understand the battery charge is maintained by the gas engine, but that’s why the CS/ER mode should in fact be called the “Hybrid Mode” rather than the “Gas Only” mode
-8
Oct 19th, 2010 (12:02 pm)The single figure ‘normalization’ presumes the distance between charges is known and the same throughout the year. That is idiotic.
-14
Oct 19th, 2010 (12:08 pm)(click to show comment)
+3
Oct 19th, 2010 (12:09 pm)No. A gallon is a scientific measurement of a quantity of liquid. It is a constant. You cannot try to figure out a constant measure like the Cost per Mile which takes into account a volatil variable in it’s formula. Costs of electricity and gas change over time, a gallon (understand a certain amount of energy stored into gas in it’s liquid state) doesn’t.
Cost isn’t efficiency. Cost is function of it.
-1
Oct 19th, 2010 (12:18 pm)I agree it is disappointing considering the 50 MPG target that GM talked about during development. Presumably one reason is the lack of an Atkinson cycle to further reduce pumping losses and increase the effective compression from 10.5 to something more like 13. I assume they just didn’t have the resources in place to modify the Family 0 1.4 liter engine in time without introducing excessive implementation risk.
But let’s keep things in perspective. With the CS numbers we have been seeing so far it seems entirely possible that the Volt will end up among the top 10 distinctively different (not just rebadged) 100+ subcompacts, compacts and small mid-size cars rated by the EPA for highway mileage and among the top 7 for combined city/highway mileage.
It would have been nice to meet or exceed the Prius mileage numbers but no other car comes close either and the Volt will give us gas-free driving for the first ~40 miles.
+3
Oct 19th, 2010 (12:22 pm)Electric power used to charge VOLT is not a ‘fuel’ — anymore than charging your cell phone is ‘refueling’. Hybrid it is. However, that term – ‘hybrid’ – is generic to ICE drives. So EPA’s challenge is to differentiate generic from Voltec ™ drive. (tm being a GM trademark) Here’s GM clarification.
“…- The Volt has an innovative electric drive system which can deliver power in both pure electric and extended range driving. The Voltec Electric Drive cannot operate without power from the electric motors. If the traction motor is disabled, the range-extending internal combustion engine cannot drive the vehicle by itself. …”
“…- There is no direct mechanical connection (fixed gear ratio) between the Volt’s extended-range 1.4L engine and the drive wheels. In extended-range driving, the engine generates power that is fed through the drive unit and is balanced by the generator and traction motor. The resulting power flow provides a 10 to 15 percent improvement in highway fuel economy….” (GM statement)
So first off, EPA ID’s Voltec drive must be defined obviously as a ‘plug-in/ICE hybrid all-electric drive’. The definition being self-explanatory.
Secondly; having defined being a plug-in – what’s its range and what’s its charge characteristics.
Then follows fuel tank size; mpg without battery; mpg with battery (mountain mode)
Once these basic parameters are measured – expected range under various scenarios.
Now what’s so hard about that? Yet EPA appears to be totally confused by generic precedence and perhaps a teaspoon of political notions.
-12
Oct 19th, 2010 (12:22 pm)(click to show comment)
-12
Oct 19th, 2010 (12:25 pm)(click to show comment)
-12
Oct 19th, 2010 (12:28 pm)(click to show comment)
-3
Oct 19th, 2010 (12:29 pm)great job, ericaelgee. everytime you type it makes it feel even better. but my beer falls off your head, too.
+5
Oct 19th, 2010 (12:35 pm)I’d say that would be an irrelevant yes. The Prius will always be a crippled EV no matter what size battery it has. Connecting both the wheels and the traction motor to the ring gear eliminates all mechanical advantage of the traction motor, requiring the engine to come on at high speeds and under accelerations. Connecting the small motor generator to the sun gear means the engine has to come on at high speeds in order to prevent the small motor generator from spinning too fast and burning up. A 50 kwh battery pack won’t help resolve either of these problems.
The Volt resolves both problems by connecting the traction motor to the sun gear, the small motor generator to the case or the ring gear, and the wheels to the planetary gear. (The engine doesn’t connect to anything directly).
The Volt is a serial hybrid. The Prius is and will always remain a parallel hybrid. What he’s saying is that a cat is just like a dog. It is if you ignore everything that differentiates dogs from cats.
-2
Oct 19th, 2010 (12:35 pm)Flaninacupboard,
thanks, flem. you bring much joy to PriLeafVille
+3
Oct 19th, 2010 (12:36 pm)Aw man, that Alcohol Abuse!
Bad PriLeaf, Bad Bad PriLeaf!!
/never spill your beer….
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (12:37 pm)PS to my post #101: The EPA label at the top is incorrect in using the term “Gas Only” (even in the CS mode the battery supplies ~1/2 of the Volt’s power, hence CS is its “Hybrid Mode”!). In addition, stating a “blended” or “combined” equivalent mileage such as 56 MPGequiv is extremely misleading because the average trip in the US only exceeds a total distance of 40 miles less than 25% of the time! Therefore no “blended” or “combined” mileage figure such as 56 MPGequiv should be included on the label unless this <25% usage factor can be fully accounted for & clearly explained.
-5
Oct 19th, 2010 (12:37 pm)I find it interesting that the EPA has apparently decided to combine city and highway results for plug-in hybrids. It is true that I see similar results overall in our Prius, but I know many Prius owners do not.
-4
Oct 19th, 2010 (12:39 pm)I’ll expound on the ‘not sure what to do.’ It has me thoroughly PO’d that the democratically controlled administration/white house used up all its political capital (and LOTS of time) on health insurance reform, with little to show for it. There were so many bigger, more important issues to deal with. While they could have addressed green houses gasses and other such controversial items, what about the power grid? Between coming EV’s and wind farms/solar displaced from population centers, there is a SCREAMING need to do something substantial. But nothing.
So I get to read more about the EPA hand wringing today, right after I read yesterday’s news about HIPAA enforcement penalties. Anybody remember HIPAA? That was SUPPOSED to protect people’s healthcare privacy, but all it did was add administrative burden to healthcare providers and ensure that family members had great difficulty in learning about/dealing with someone’s hospital stay. Because you are not allowed to have patients know what other patients are being treated at the same facility (like they can’t see them in the waiting room?), our creative solution was to use invisible ink and hold a black light (and paper to obscure previous names) over the sheet while they signed it. It’s almost laughable what chaos HIPAA has caused, but I thought we at least had it under control.
Nope, this administration has decided our healthcare privacy is just SO important that they raised the penalty for violation from a max of $25K to $1.5M. Were HIPAA violations just so rampant that the government had to step in and do something? Didn’t they lift the Gulf drilling moratorium without really addressing the inches thick goo on the seabed? I know I have 3 disparate thoughts here, but I have to link all this misguided government crap together…If GM progressed with the Volt at the same speed the government has progressed with this rating system, the vehicle would be ready just in time for ‘Mr Fusion’.
I have lost all faith in this government. I’ll end where I started. ‘Not sure what to do’ is the understatement of the century. I am ready to vote out every incumbent just on principle.
Oct 19th, 2010 (12:39 pm)It has more to do with the efficiency of the car than the engine. The original specs said it would take 8 kWh to go 40 miles. If that were true then the MPG in CS Mode would be about 50 MPG. But it’s taking closer to 10 kWh to go 40 miles so you’re getting an MPG more in the upper 30s.
Oct 19th, 2010 (12:40 pm)Hey, now that we all know the Govt EPA will Fuc#$%^&* everything up, what about the CARB states? How are they going to test for “SMOG Emissions”?
They (Volts) will do a lot of start stops of the ICE in city driving. What effect does that have for CARB states? How will that be handled? Has it even been tested yet?
There’s your next topic Lyle!
-8
Oct 19th, 2010 (12:43 pm)And yet the PiP has a lower kwh/mile consumption ratio than the Volt.
Hmmm
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (12:57 pm)Actually a gallon is defined differently, depending on which side of the pond you live on.
Imperial gal. /= US gal.
“One imperial gallon is approximately equal to 1.201 U.S. gallons”
Oct 19th, 2010 (12:57 pm)Here’s what will most likely happen….
Wife comes home from work, Volt reads “Avg: 87mpg”…
Wife plugs in to charge…
Wife didn’t put gas in car and only has 1 gallon left…
[Next Morning]
Wife forgets she has a meeting in Concord CA, rushes out the door…
Google sez Concord is 78 miles so she “Thinks” she’ll make it there with the 87mpg……..
CaptJackSparrow gets an irate phone call and get’s hit with the b|tch stick through the phone…..NOT COOL!
/but seriously, how many times does that have to play out till the Volt get’s a black eye?
DO NOT BLEND MPG WITH AER!
DO NOT BLEND MPG WITH AER!
DO NOT BLEND MPG WITH AER!
DO NOT BLEND MPG WITH AER!
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (12:58 pm)Is there a “Peasant Gallon”?
-7
Oct 19th, 2010 (1:00 pm)And vote in the people that started a war on a whim and a rumor, encouraged a non-transparent, unfunded derivatives market that dwarfs the entire US net worth, is still not sure that climate change is anthropogenic, and thinks that corporations are the best source of regulation ?
Americans get what they deserve.
-8
Oct 19th, 2010 (1:02 pm)Let’s see… The Volt is far more expensive, far heavier, amazingly expensive, poor Dead Battery Fuel Economy, fewer seats, far less luggage capacity.
Which part of “better” did I miss?
Of course, “better” for a Chevy salesperson is perhaps a bit different than “better” for the rest of us. “Amazingly expensive but supported by an outrageous $7500 in tax money” is probably a very good thing for a Chevy salesperson.
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (1:04 pm)Health care reform doesn’t interest me much personally but the numbers show it’s the biggest issue facing the country. Projections show spending on health to amount to 50% of GDP in the next thirty years. Are you kidding me? If health care is 20% of GDP you don’t have much of an economy and we’re getting there pretty quickly.
Now the bill which was passed contains a lot of different cost containment elements but it’s more like throwing a lot of stuff against the wall and seeing what sticks. However, unless you have a national health plan in place you can’t have any effective cost containment measures, so in this sense the bill was a necessary foundation.
Personally I’m more frustrated with voters than the government. People want something for nothing and they vote for anyone who promises it to them. I saw an interview with Erik Cantor who said the Republicans had now gotten religion and would press legislation to balance the budget. The interviewer asked him what they would cut. The first thing out of his mouth was that they would not cut Defense. The interviewer asked again what he would cut, at which point Erik went off talking about spending too much on paper clips or something.
The fact is that if you want a balanced budget you need to cut Defense, Social Security, and Medicare by 30% – 40%. Or you need to raise taxes. Or some combination. But no one will say this because if they did wouldn’t get elected. So what we get are promises of something for nothing, or in this case a lot of somethings for nothing — you get the Erik Cantors of the world. Do I think Erik Cantor is stupid? Nope. He knows he’s peddling BS. But he also knows that only politicians who promise somethings for nothing get elected. But of course after they get elected they can’t produce the somethings for nothing and the voters “get angry”. At some point the political charade needs to end but at this point the voters are getting EXACTLY what they’re asking for.
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (1:07 pm)So it looks like the EPA needs some new formulas and units of measure. I hope they won’t ignore the playboy (and girl) crowd, you know those people who spend half their wealth on wine, women, and song and then just squander the rest.
I’ll suggest they could inform the public like I have done with a label on my Jeep. First you convert shots of gasoline into fifths and then calculate the final figure in furlongs.
BIG BTRY
-6
Oct 19th, 2010 (1:09 pm)I agree with most of your post except the excerpted part. A NHS is no panacea for cost, just ask the UK. We need either a healthier population, or rationing of taxpayer subsidy.
Oct 19th, 2010 (1:10 pm)Dude, you must live in Kahl-ee-forrneeyah too!
-3
Oct 19th, 2010 (1:19 pm)And the #1, #2 and #3 items… aren’t they Social Security, Medicare and Defense (not necessarily in that order)? Cantor’s not going to cut Defense? Which leaves…? Well, I’d like to see him try to cut Medicare or Social Security. And you know he’s not going to touch anything like ag subsidies; the Red States pull in way too much money from those.
-5
Oct 19th, 2010 (1:21 pm)We already have health care rationing. Right now, it’s done by insurance companies. This might be OK for you but for many it’s not working out quite so swimmingly.
+2
Oct 19th, 2010 (1:24 pm)This is why you’re annoying.
Me: The Prius will never be an EV.
You: So explain why the plug-in Prius uses fewer KWh from electricity than the Volt uses from electricity.
Answer: Cause the PIP is using kWh from the battery AND from the gas tank.
A gallon of gas contains 36 kWh of energy. The Prius gets 50 MPG. Stated alternatively the Prius uses 720 wh/mile. The Volt is using 270 wh/mile. Last I checked 720 > 270. And the PIP isn’t going to change that. For a real drive cycle the PIP will have to use the engine — like I said, the PIP is incapable of being an EV. So even if the Prius was more efficient for that part of the cycle which uses only electricity, and it’s not, then the much higher kWh consumption when using gas will raise the wh/mile well above what you’d get from a Volt.
FWIW the reason the Prius won’t match the Volt when driving on electricity is that attaching both the wheels and the traction motor to the ring gear is not a prescription for efficiency. Do you even understand how the Prius works?
-5
Oct 19th, 2010 (1:31 pm)Oh, I forgot, “props up the South Korean battery industry.” Which is, obviously, way better than “props up the Japanese battery industry.”
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (1:33 pm)Tall Pete,
Tall Pete;
Yes thats exactly the point I keep making about the Volt and Charging at work and in parking lots. Together this allows many more miles of AER driving with the Volt than a pure EV because you can take your Volt on all trips without worry, but you can keep charging and running up the EV miles.
So with parking lot charging last week my expected AER goes from 220 to 372 miles out of 407 miles driven. Yet with an EV only, I wouldn’t have risked taking the LEAF on some of those trips.
So I would like to see the issue of mandating parking lots of certain sizes to have EV charging. This is not really that big of a deal. Parking lots generally have lighting, pavement etc., taxes, snow removal etc., there are costs with maintaining a parking lot. Adding charging stations over the long haul is a small cost compared to other costs.
Perhaps now that Lyle has gotten the Volt to this point, he’ll realize how important getting charging stations in parking lots is to mass adoption.
I keep posting this because I think this is the next big hurdle. My example for what I feel is typical driving just shows that you can’t achieve significant AER without this infrastructure, and you can’t be free from worry without the volt.
I hope this companies website is correct:
http://www.pepstations.com/Portals/0/PDF/Brochure.pdf
“The International Code Council (ICC) and the American Institute of Architects is working to develop an International Green Construction Code, to become effective in 2012. The code will cover all spectrums of sustainable design and construction, including a requirement for alternative-fuel vehicle parking, similar to the requirement for handicap parking spaces. The code is expected to require that buildings in excess of 10,000 square feet and an occupant load of 100 provide 5%, but not less than 2 parking spaces, which are designated for low-emission, hybrid and electric vehicles. These are changes that will affect everyone, and they are just around the corner”
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (1:33 pm)The problem with health care is that everyone is always spending others people money. Who wants a lower priced but less effective treatment? No one cause they’re not paying for it. Only the best and damn the cost. I’m sure Corvette Guy would love to sell cars where the government or an insurance company paid and the decision as to what car and what options was left to “the customer and the car salesperson”. Every person would have a Corvette. Or a Volt! Ba ha ha ha ha ha ha!
You can’t supply enough of a free good or service. When people have to pay then the system will be subject to the laws of economics, doctors and hospitals will advertise prices, and costs will be contained. Until then forget it. IMO.
-3
Oct 19th, 2010 (1:37 pm)Sounds like we have something to disagree about
Insurance companies do not ration to any significant degree, they pass on costs to their base or make up expensive packages. You can buy as generous a package as you want and are able to afford. A $45k Volt is not ‘Volt rationing,’ as an example of why I do not call current insurance practice rationing.
Back to the point of public spending on healthcare: when an uninsured patient is admitted to a hospital, for most (and I really mean >99.9%) of cases the only arbiter of what services are given is the physician who does not take cost into account — in fact, it is considered unethical and illegal in the US to do otherwise. Organ transplants are the rare (but not always) exception.
Disclaimer: I am a hospital based physician.
Oct 19th, 2010 (1:39 pm)Right you are.
-7
Oct 19th, 2010 (1:42 pm)Closer to 35 kwh/gallon, to be accurate. Your argument is silly because you ignore the source fuel which is NOT electricity, it is whatever was collected/burned to make the electricity.
-2
Oct 19th, 2010 (1:52 pm)And vote in… who? Sharron Angle as opposed to Harry Reid? Angle says Shari’a law is actually running a couple of American cities. This is, in fact, entirely false. But it says something about Sharron Angle, doesn’t it? Either she’s so ignorant and/or such a complete Islamaphobe that she believes it or she’s willing to tell any lie, no matter how outrageous, to get votes.
Oct 19th, 2010 (1:54 pm)Hi # 109 EricLG:
The part of my post leading to your comment concerning CVT’s I quoted directly from GM spokes, not by me. (A CVT is a continuously variable transmission versus the standard conventional fixed ratio tranny.)
However, CVT the Voltec is not. The idea being to engage VOLT’s ER ICE in ‘balance’ with the battery to drive the genny. (I denoted ‘balance’ as these are GM’s words exactly.)
Its not just a good idea – its a definitive advancement of effectuating battery power to the generator. Upping efficiency by 10%-15% is nothing to sniff about. Case in point.
A 1987 Sierra Classic (Blazer) GMC got hardly 14.5-15 mpg highway. Today, that same truck gets maybe 16-18 mpg — and that’s 24 years of improvement — 24 years and barely a 15% improvement with the best electronics.
+2
Oct 19th, 2010 (2:02 pm)Nope. We’ll have better calibrated numbers soon from the Volt advisory board members
but in the meantime there have been a few useful gas-only CS numbers published.
MSNBC: 38.7 MPG (mostly driving down I-5 from Seattle to San Francisco at 65 MPH)
Car and Driver: ~40 MPG (adjusted to ~60 MPH from C&D’s 34 MPG at steady 80 MPH)
Popular Mechanics: ~40 MPG (adjusted to ~60 MPH from PM’s 36 MPG at 78 MPH?)
I adjusted the Car and Driver and Popular Mechanics results by about %20 based on information at http://www.drive55.org/. That seems like a conservative adjustment.
The EPA highway tests are conducted at speeds around 50-60 MPH. I looked up the top results for the 2010 and 2011 model years (not all 2011 results have been published yet). Here are the latest high ranking gasoline highway numbers (excluding teeny-tiny SMART fortwo):
48 MPG – 2010 Toyota Prius
43 MPG – 2011 Honda Civic Hybrid
43 MPG – 2010 Honda Insight Hybrid
40 MPG – 2011 Ford Fiesta SFE
40 MPG – 2011 Chevrolet Cruze Eco (public claim, not yet published by EPA)
* 39 MPG – 2011 Chevrolet Volt Hybrid (?) (based on limited public reviews)
39 MPG – 2011 Honda CR-Z Hybrid
37 MPG – 2011 MINI Cooper
The combined mileage leaders are:
50 MPG – 2010 Toyota Prius
41 MPG – 2011 Honda Civic Hybrid
41 MPG – 2011 Honda Insight Hybrid
39 MPG – 2011 Ford Fusion Hybrid
* 38 MPG – 2011 Chevrolet Volt Hybrid (?) (based on limited public reviews)
37 MPG – 2011 Honda CR-Z Hybrid
35 MPG – 2010 Lexus HS 250h Hybrid
34 MPG – 2010 Nissan Altima Hybrid
33 MPG – 2011 Toyota Camry Hybrid
Sources:
http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2010/10/12/5274752-what-goods-a-volt-without-an-outlet
http://twitter.com/search?q=%23ElectricRoadTrip
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/car/10q4/2011_chevrolet_volt_full_test-road_test
http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/alternative-fuel/electric/chevy-volt-range-tests
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/
-6
Oct 19th, 2010 (2:02 pm)The AER efficiency of the PIP can be compared to the AER efficiency of the Volt, and that was my earlier point. The PiP goes about 14 miles on ~ 3.0 kwh — I don’t have the exact number handy The Volt will go about 35 miles on 8.8 kwh.
The arithmetic disagrees with your grand pronouncement, although I will say that conclusions of efficiency have to be tempered by differences in vehicle weight, amongst other variables. Nonetheless, the data do not support the Volt PSD arrangement as superior to the Prius’ in terms of drivetrain EV efficiency.
+3
Oct 19th, 2010 (2:05 pm)What will really be interesting is when Toyota licenses this techonology from GM. Then i’m sure the tune will change from the Toyota fans.
-9
Oct 19th, 2010 (2:13 pm)This is a car with an identity crisis.
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (2:19 pm)It would be nice to see some of those solar-cell parking stations. Keep the rain off your car, keep it cool, and charge it grid free (for those who worry about daytime blackouts). Wonder if you could harness the rain-water power too?
-7
Oct 19th, 2010 (2:23 pm)Why would Toyota license anything from GM? Are they planning to build a PHEV Prius with very poor DBFE (Dead Battery Fuel Economy)? Or an outrageously expensive PHEV Prius? Or a surprisingly heavy PHEV Prius?
-4
Oct 19th, 2010 (2:24 pm)MT reviewed the prototype PiP last month, and said it would cost $26,500.
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/alternative/1009_2010_toyota_prius_plug_in_hybrid_electric_vehicle_prototype_test/index.html
A 70 – 80 mpg car for most people at $26,500 sounds like a killer product.
-6
Oct 19th, 2010 (2:27 pm)Hah! That make me chuckle
-2
Oct 19th, 2010 (2:27 pm)I think we know that if you increase the gas engine efficiency by 10-15% by implementing Atkinson cycle then the CS-mode MPG will go up around the same amount. Once you also take into account the extra 700 pounds on the Volt versus the regular Prius those factors in combination will probably account for the large majority of the mileage difference.
We just don’t know enough about the efficiency specs for the pure EV aspects of the Volt to assign blame there yet for the lower mileage numbers being seen.
-7
Oct 19th, 2010 (2:29 pm)I luv my pawns. Most people think you are leeches with bad attitudes, losers with nothing else to do, bitter, down & out american-job haters, but I know better. Continue in your role of helping me re-educate the other posters here. We are of superior blood. Let’s create a brave new world together.
+2
Oct 19th, 2010 (2:37 pm)The recent revelations about the gas engine and the Volt planetary gears and clutches make the Volt, like the Prius, a serial/parallel hybrid. When the clutches connect the gas engine and the generator to the ring gear in CS-mode you will be generating electricity and mechanically driving the wheels much like a Prius does although there are differences in the details. The Prius is not a pure parallel hybrid — it cannot directly drive the wheels using it’s gas engine without also driving an electric motor — and the Volt is not a pure serial hybrid.
Oct 19th, 2010 (2:40 pm)CaptJackSparrow,
Lets not classify the chicks before they are hatched. The test Prius PHV has a 13 mile
AER. The AER of the product to be brought to market in June 2012 has an unknown AER, maybe 13, maybe more. Remember, they are collecting data and will modify the final product accordingly.
Similarly, the CS mode city/highway mileage according to the EPA is still unknown, the highway mileage might be “40-50″ or it might be “33-47.”
-6
Oct 19th, 2010 (2:43 pm)I do not think of the clutches as defining the drivetrain architecture but rather optimizing it at the cost of money, complexity, and reliability. Otherwise I agree with Jeff N that both cars are P/S hybrids with different size batteries and motors.
+2
Oct 19th, 2010 (2:48 pm)Because its patented by GM. So Toyota will have to license it from them.
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (2:48 pm)You assume too much. I didn’t say who I would vote FOR. I am actually hoping Charlie Crist becomes FL’s next Senator. Not so much because I like Crist, but I like the concept. Just like Joe Lieberman in CT, it is nice to see that an INDEPENDENT can get away from (BOTH) parties that have become polarized and out of touch. Crist is trying to do (for disheartened MODERATE Republicans) what Lieberman did for Democrats. I am tired of politicians standing up for a platform like stooges. They get so worried about some base of support that they lose all creative thought.
You assumed something because I pointed out the current party in power. BELIEVE ME, I would be JUST as concerned if the pendulum swung entirely in the other direction. Polarity is not good in government. Ben Franklin had an awesome impact on the founding of our country. It wasn’t because he was filled with great ideas; it was because he was a moderating influence that engendered compromise. When compromise is required, people actually have to THINK about the issue. I see no thinking going on in Washington these days.
I brought up the power grid as a matter of infrastructure where something could be created from an inactive workforce. Healthcare spending is not THE issue of concern- and (DonC) it doesn’t matter what percentage of GDP it is. Our country is in the doldrums- like the 1930s all over again. We got dams and highways for our New Deal spending that put people back to work. Work on energy infrastructure could do the same thing right now. AFTER people are working and the economy is ticking again, THEN let’s discuss secondary and tertiary issues like health insurance. Hint hint- health insurance is usually an employment benefit and if you aren’t employed, you don’t have it. JOBS FIRST (and oh, btw, buying a Volt helps in that regard, too).
-2
Oct 19th, 2010 (2:54 pm)OK, we agree on something… SPV-covered parking would be a plus. Feed the grid when a car isn’t parked there, of course. Shading the car provides a bonus, too.
I think the rainwater capture idea won’t be cost-effective, though.
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (3:00 pm)There is no metion that the same electricity that an EV can use is also being consumed by refineries to extract gasoline from petroleum. But electricity has other sources, such as coal, natural gas, wind, solar, hydro, etc. Gasoline only comes from petroleum, and the purpose of EVs and hybrids is to reduce dependency of fossil fuels. Buying a Prius instead of the Volt will not be enough to slow that dependency (it will make a Japanese VP more money!). We need more EVs and more American support!
Raymond
-1
Oct 19th, 2010 (3:04 pm)I doubt that GM’s going to pick up an easy 10-15% by going to Atkinson cycle; GM is probably already using an Atkinson cycle. If the Volt ICE was an Otto cycle, I’d expect more like 95-100hp from a 1.4L engine, rather than the 74hp it does generate. Especially considering it’s using premium, which usually allows additional power from a given displacement.
For comparison purposes, Toyota’s 1.5L Atkinson cycle engine in the ’04-’09 Prius was about 78hp. The 1.5L Otto cycle engine Toyota uses in the Yaris is about 105hp.
+3
Oct 19th, 2010 (3:06 pm)DonC
While I don’t completely disagree with what you are saying, to be fair your comments are more applicable to the Gen2 HSD (P112 transaxle) than the newer Gen3/PHEV as technically Toyota changed the Prius transaxle in 2010.
Dubbed the P410, in which it’s 60kW traction motor has actually been physically downsized (to reduce weight and potentially improve efficiency) and produces less torque. Subsequently they added a compound planetary arrangement (a variation of a Wilson gearset utilizing a common, yet differently sized internal/ring gear) to create a ~2.6:1 reduction for MG2 in order to increase it’s output torque.
So on the newer Prius MG2 is actually connected to a reduction sun gear much like the Volt, however on the P410 the reduction planet carrier is fixed to the case (held) in order to create the reduction to the common ring gear. ICE is still connected to the carrier, and MG1 still the sun of the input split gearset as before, but now balances it’s output to the common ring gear with the output of the MG2 reduction drive.
So this arrangement is also used in the plug-in Prius and one of the reasons why the electric motor is limited to ~60mph as even though it has a much higher rev limit (~14K rpm), it must spin 2.6 times faster than the previous design (P112) in order to create the reduction at the ring gear. (1 revolution of the ring gear required 2.63 revolutions of MG2) so torque is greatly diminished at higher speeds.
Since MG2 must spin so much faster,numerous other changes were made to reduce iron/copper losses, motor drive “boost” voltages and frequencies increased, and additional oil cooling added.
So IMO on the PHEV Prius the smaller motor creates limitations to pure EV capability as subsequently the maximum torque delivered by the smaller MG2 (with the help of the reduction gearset) is still limited and as such ICE is required to fire up and deliver additional torque under high demand conditions. (i.e. greater than 80% throttle at low (urban) speeds and greater than 40% throttle at highway speeds) resulting in a cyclic pattern of ICE ON-OFF (e.g. during an EPA test cycle) while in Charge Depletion (CD) mode. Something the Volt doesn’t need do and therefore CD is pure electric, even when it occasionally coupling MG1 to MG2 via it’s output split gearset.
So despite the obviously successful attempt to increase this Gen3 Prius HSD efficiency, in the PHEV it’s smallish battery (currently 5.2kWh) results in only ~12-13 miles of “speed/load limited” EV operation. However based on the same surveys GM is using this would only satisfy the commutes of ~30% of Americans (the higher numbers “thrown around” by the Trolls are from Toyota and are for Japan)
Nothings really stopping Toyota from increasing the energy of their PHEV battery But this will come with a significant weight penalty which of course will have an offsetting adverse effect.Plus given it’s current location they really couldn’t increase the battery size significantly with out essentially cutting their rear storage down to impractical dimensions and shape.(and folding the rear seats down would be meaningless further reducing utility)
So while the current PHEV Prius doesn’t really create much competition for the Volt or Leaf in terms of electrical capability, Toyota has recently been talking about an all-new electrically powered vehicle designed to compete more directly. So we shall see.The good news is ?The War Is ON” and the ultimate benefactor (hopefully) be the consumer (with more choices and lower costs) and of course the planet and future generations as our awkward reliance on fossil fuels diminishes.
JMO
WopOnTour
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (3:06 pm)hey, that was a valid point. Why’d I get hit with negs?
My point is that the blended mpg the EPA is going to use is false in all aspects of driving when it comes to range and how you drive.
/dang, tough crowd.
+2
Oct 19th, 2010 (3:08 pm)Toyota did get their ideas from an American engineer, Victor Wouk. Look it up.
Raymond
-7
Oct 19th, 2010 (3:11 pm)Raymond,
I have read that argument from you before, and I do not agree. Prius is within the budget of most working people, while Volt is *maybe* for the top 5% — or less. Prius will cut fossil fuel use by up to*50% compared to current US average vehicle consumption if all vehicles are replaced with Prius. Volt will reduce fossil fuel consumption by at most 5%.
That is a *tremendous* place to start. If you have $45k to spend on a car, then sure — go right ahead and buy a Volt if you want to. But as a national public policy it is — forgive the language — brain dead.
* I say “up to” to highlight the implicit assumption that fuel savings will not be spent elsewhere.
Oct 19th, 2010 (3:11 pm)We have that here in Bayamon, Puerto Rico. Here is the article (in Spanish):
http://www.elnuevodia.com/bayamonenbuscadesuautonomiaenergetica-782325.html
Raymond
Oct 19th, 2010 (3:14 pm)Yeah, those were just numbers i’ve seen thrown around by ABG MT and other sites. I just used them for examples of what *I* think should be the method of metrics.
It’s KISS if you ask me. No trying to figure out how the EPA drove in the test to achieve the “blended mpg”. Straight forward…….at least I think.
Oct 19th, 2010 (3:14 pm)There is some conflicting info in your comment but I believe what you mean is Turbo gives higher power for a smaller engine which is in agreement with what said. A 1.4L Turbo will have poorer BSFC than a 1.4L NA with all else being equal, but the turbo is capable of higher power. The higher power capacity of the 1.0L Turbo vs a 1.0L NA allows it to provide good efficiency at the normal 15-25KW cruise loads but still be able to supply 50KW when needed. Odds are it would have been more efficient at the normal highway loads but less efficient at 50KW than the 1.4L NA engine used.
Oct 19th, 2010 (3:19 pm)I disagree. it is trivial.
The only complicating factor is that people keep wanting to put a square peg in a round hole. Stop trying to come up with a single MPG number to put on the Volt. It doesn’t need one.
All you need to know is how far you can drive before the battery gets to “customer empty” (AER)
and the fuel efficiency in steady state after that (charge sustaining MPG)
Any other numbers are pure voodoo in my opinion.
(5 Days until I drive a Volt)
Oct 19th, 2010 (3:20 pm)Good explanation koz. I actually understood it!
-8
Oct 19th, 2010 (3:22 pm)I notice that you neglect to mention Wouk’s Prius ownership; his opinion that Toyota did not infringe any of his patents; and his statements damning Detroit and praising Japan for having the foresight to extend and commercially develop the hybrid idea.
You should reread Bob Lutz’s hybrid announcements for a laugh.
Oct 19th, 2010 (3:22 pm)kdawg,
Can’t do that because kWh and gallons cost different everywhere. My electric is 0.167/kWh in the summer, about 0.152 in winter, go to a nearby state and I can save 0.25/gallon.
Oct 19th, 2010 (3:24 pm)“VooDoo”…..lol
I like that term.
98MPGvoodoo
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (3:29 pm)This is a site with a Troll problem.
Oct 19th, 2010 (3:29 pm)The Volt will cut fossil fuel use by more than twice that of the Prius. Its a huge improvement.
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (3:31 pm)From the Motor Trend article: “The average number of miles the PPI’s ‘EV’ light remained on (indicating that electrical power from being plugged in is available) was 11.7 miles.”
Doing the math I get 256 Whr/mi for the PPI and 251 Whr/mi for the Volt. So The Motor Trend data doesn’t support you. I guess we’ll have to wait for the EPA to test them both under identical conditions to know for sure.
Oct 19th, 2010 (3:32 pm)Yeah, the EPA label above is close, but I would put my thumb over the voodoo 98 MPGe number. Why convert kW-h to mpg?
+6
Oct 19th, 2010 (3:35 pm)As usual the Trolls use the favorable end of any Prius specification, and the least favorable tolerance for anything Volt.
They can round up and down with the best politicians!
WOT
-3
Oct 19th, 2010 (3:35 pm)Welcome to the Red Side of GM-Volt.com.
Actually, I’m pretty sure that the Volt display would show her both the EV range and the range available on the remaining gas, so she’d be warned that she was not going to make it.
Not that such would necessarily save you from an evening or two of misery.
Oct 19th, 2010 (3:37 pm)My understanding is that the load range that matters most to the Volt’s CS mode mpg numbers is 15-25KW (normal highway driving loads).
Oct 19th, 2010 (3:40 pm)Those are so close I can apply my “Beer rule of thumb”…
“If the BEER’s cold………..who gives a sh|t”
Oct 19th, 2010 (3:47 pm)According to the specs on gm-volt.com, the Volt’s engine is 84 HP at 4800 RPM
with a compression ratio of 10.5:1. A typical Atkinson cycle engine like the Prius or the Ford Fusion has an effective compression ratio of 12.5 – 13.0:1.
The 2011 Toyota Yaris 1.5 Liter engine develops 106 HP at 6000 RPM, according to Edmunds.com.
The GM “Family 0″ 1.4 Liter engine used in the Volt is generally rated as developing 87-90 HP at 5600 RPM, according to Wikipedia. The 5600 RPM rating implies that the Volt’s maximum engine RPM of 4800 results in slightly less than the engine’s inherent peak HP capability in return for quieter operation.
Therefore, it does not appear to me that the Volt engine is using Atkinson cycle. The Volt specs appear to be consistent with the Otto cycle version of the same engine used in other GM cars. Finally, GM has specifically denied that the Volt engine uses Atkinson cycle.
HP RPM Comp. ratio Vehicle
175 6000 9.7:1 2011 Ford Fusion 2.5L I4 (Otto)
156 6000 12.3:1 2011 Ford Fusion 2.5L I4 (Atkinson)
106 6000 10.5:1 2011 Toyota Yaris 1.5L (Otto)
87-90 5600 10.5:1 GM Family 0 1.4L (TwinPort/ECOFlex) (Otto)
84 4800 10.5:1 2011 Chevrolet Volt 1.4L (Otto?)
70 4500 13.0:1 2001 Toyota Prius 1.5L (Atkinson)
76 5000 13.0:1 2004 Toyota Prius 1.5L (Atkinson)
Sources:
http://gm-volt.com/full-specifications/
http://www.fordvehicles.com/cars/fusion/specifications/engine/
http://www.edmunds.com/new/2011/toyota/yaris/101352742/specs.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GM_Family_0_engine
http://www.motortrend.com/oftheyear/car/112_04_coy_win/specs_price.html
http://www.motortrend.com/cars/2001/toyota/prius/specifications/index.html
http://www.allaboutprius.com/…/1014183_the-priuss-not-so-secret-gas-mileage- secrets
-4
Oct 19th, 2010 (3:49 pm)The EV mode ends before the battery range is depleted to allow for efficient ICE warm-up. 14 EV miles total is pretty real-world for the PiP, at least if you accept the extended CR testing experience their staffers accumulated, as well as the handful of Prius enthusiasts who have driven the PiP about a week at a time each.
Oct 19th, 2010 (3:56 pm)Yeah, given the margin or error the input figures must have it can only be coincidence those two figures only differ by 2%. There’s going to be a lot of beer drunk (drank?) before we see the official EPA figures on both vehicles.
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (3:56 pm)AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!!!!!!
/good one……..politicians!……lol
Oct 19th, 2010 (4:05 pm)Better than a letter but not by much. The problem is that too many assumptions have to be made to reduce it to one number and those assumptions (gas price, electricity price, miles driven per charge) all have to be reasonably accurate for the number to mean anything. Truth is that if 40 miles AER and 40mpg are about right then this could be a 44mpge car for some and a 1200mpge for others. How can one number represent that in a meaningful way?
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (4:13 pm)If we’re talking enthusiast miles we’ll only have to wait a little longer to see what range Volt enthusiasts get. I’m betting it will be better than the 35 miles you quoted since Chelsea Sexton got 57.8 miles of electric range from the Volt. Once we get official Volt EV range figures from the EPA how long will we have to wait for official figures for the PiP?
Oct 19th, 2010 (4:16 pm)You probably shouldn’t believe everything you read about the NHS on that side of the pond…
Oct 19th, 2010 (4:32 pm)The EPA’s keenness to quantify EV fuel efficiency in MPGe terms is laudable.
Especially if ecology or greenness are at stake – everyone on here who estimates they’re going to get 500mpg because most of their journeys are within the AER are treating electricity as if it’s free. Clearly it isn’t – the energy has to come from somewhere. An electric F350 will still be a guzzler, even though it has zero tailpipe emissions. The apples versus oranges argument has some validity but this is all energy so it’s comparable. The nuts and bolts are tricky but it’s basically doable.
It’s a nonsense to do it in $ terms as you don’t want to have to re-calculate all the stickers evry 3/6/12 months. You also need to be able, for example, to compare Volt I with Volt II, and if they’re never labeled in the same period you can never compare them.
On the topic of the turbocharger: the addition of a turbocharger increases the thermodynamic efficiency of the ICE. This is because it recoups “low-grade” energy from the exhaust flow, and cycles it back into the engine for useful work – whether or not the engine is throttled / throttleless. The reason we’ve all come across horribly inefficient turbo’d engines is that many of these have been turbo’d for power – so for example on part throttle the turbo may not be spinning adequately and compression is poor; and on high throttle the mixture has often been run rich to cool the cylinder for max power.
It’s possible to avoid these pitfalls given careful design and an eye for overall efficiency, and gain in both efficiency *and* power for a given engine size. E.g. Cruze turbo. Another great example: BMW 320d ED – 0-60 in 7.7s and 57.5mpg combined (US gallons, Euro test cycle: 68.9mpg imperial).
Sorry, just had to get that off my chest!
M
Oct 19th, 2010 (4:48 pm)With driver + 2 passengers and 2 bags/luggage (they were coming from the airport) on board.
Oct 19th, 2010 (4:51 pm)The percentile rank would only give you a score relative to the group. So for example if you know that a Camry got 58 and a Malibu got 60, you would know that the rating of the Malibu is slightly better.
People compare cars; they dont buy according to EPA ratings. If the difference between the car you choose and another one in the same category is not much, you know it is still a good choice even if the other is slightly better.
Because frankly, who get the EPA mileage really ? If you are very careful, you can sometimes get a better score. Most of the time, you score less. So it’s not that meaningful anyway.
We need a way to compare more than a way to know exactly what the fuel economy could / might be in the best of times.
And don’t get me started about how much $$ your gas will cost in a year. It’s even less meaningful because really who knows how much we will pay a gallon in the next 6 months ?
Oct 19th, 2010 (4:57 pm)You have to also admit that all of them are most likely well versed in getting the best mpg.
/IMHO, I say take what they get and shave off a few miles or mpg for the rest of us.
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (4:57 pm)It may help with efficiency at the upper end of output but not at standard highway speeds. In this situation, it is mostly dead weight and load. That is why the 1.8L NA Cruze gets 36mpg highway and the 1.4LT Cruze gets 36mpg highway. If they offered a 1.4L NA, it would get better mileage but the performance would be unacceptable.
-6
Oct 19th, 2010 (5:03 pm)Matt B,
The EPA (with GM lobbying pushing this nonsense) is not trying to come up with a energy/distance number, but a LIQUID_FUEL/distance number. The former is easy because combustion efficiencies are similar whether we use a car engine or a central plant, the latter is idiocy because each owner will have their personal driving patterns that will determine the fraction of daily driving using each fuel source.
As Koz said a little while ago, the number is in the range of ~35 to infinity miles/gallon.
-4
Oct 19th, 2010 (5:09 pm)Driving back roads at a leisurely 45 mph; and in Sexton’s case putting the car into neutral going downhill. At this point I might as well remind you that a Prius gets up to 120 mpg in almost equally synthetic, NON-REAL-WORLD driving.
Oct 19th, 2010 (5:17 pm)Actually, an energy efficiency number based on KWH delivered from the gas station and from wall would have some meaning but it still would not tell the whole story. The consumer should be given a means to calculate what their personal cost will be as well as given a means to understand how many gallons of gas the car will save. Those metrics are important to the individual and to the community at large.
1.47 miles/kwh is the best for currently mass produced cars (no offense to Tesla intended)
@4.17miles/kwh for the Volt in CD and @1.18miles/kwh in CS mode
ICE dependent cars, even at their best, waste a LOT of potential energy and a mostly foreign produced, non-renewable source at that. These numbers would accurately illustrate this.
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (5:24 pm)I agree that people need a means of comparison and that is one of the purposes of the window sticker, but I’m sorry I cannot see your logic for one number. The EPA values as revised in 2008, are acutally pretty accurate but even before they were useful. They gave a reference point and someone that had experince driving could get a feel to where they were in relation to the EPA numbers. This one number you propose will not do that for most people. For one extreme, that number whould be somewhere between the Prius’ and the Fusion hybrid’s. For the other extreme, that number would be 20 times greater than the Prius’. Everybody will fall in various places inbetween. The only way to give information that can be reasonably accurately used to make the comparisons, is to just give the base EPA CD and CS mode values. The could also make a chart as I suggested earlier that the consumer can get close to what his annual consumption would be. They could use your numbering scheme and a chart to present a range of numbers that would be meaningful.
Oct 19th, 2010 (5:27 pm)Why don’t they hire some MIT or CalTech grads or NASA Mathemeticians to come up with this? They could probably have this done inside of a day!
+2
Oct 19th, 2010 (5:58 pm)WopOnTour, I want to applaud your regular contributions to this blog! It’s GREAT to have the inputs of someone who is so obviously very well informed as well as a specialist in the technology involved! I read all your posts closely, as I’m sure most others do (who knows, perhaps even the “Toy Trolls”, whom we seemingly have to endlessly endure whether we want to or not).
Be assured that you, my “virtual friend”, are always an extremely welcome participant here! Where else could we expect to discover a technical “gem” like the following?……
-6
Oct 19th, 2010 (6:06 pm)About the same as the average centralized US electric plant. In winter the efficient ICE car outperforms the EV in efficiency terms because the waste heat is used. As an example, one owner of the mini-EV reported that his range declined from 100 to 70 miles in the NJ winter, implying that ~50% more electric energy was used in the winter. If summer Volt consumption is 270 wh/mile, it will jump to 400 wh/mile in the winter. Or in actual energy consumed (~ 3x), 1.2 kwh/mile. Note that I didn’t calculate transit or charging losses which are 15-20% additional. Make that 1.4 – 1.5 kwh/mile in the winter.
EV is not a free lunch, or a panacea. Unless you charge from your own PV.
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (6:16 pm)Actually EVChel’s partner had never driven a hybrid before.
Oct 19th, 2010 (6:18 pm)Raymondjram,
Hi, Raymond. I got a email from Helm Inc. today. My Volt “glove box owners manual” is “in the mail.” “Your order, xxxxxxx, containing items fulfilled from Helm Incorporated shipped on 10/19/2010.”
-4
Oct 19th, 2010 (6:20 pm)As you can see Koz, the storyline change for the Volt from “EV” to efficiency is none too complimentary.
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (6:21 pm)EricLG,
You will use more energy in the winter just like any mode of transportation.. the ICE engine uses more energy also. Range being down because of temperature is not a indication of using more energy. It is that the battery has less output. You will use more energy but not 50% more.
Any ICE engine uses more energy also. I typically get 1 or 2 mpg less in the cold months here in PA.. but I did see on a TV News report that Prius owners were getting 26mpg because the car was always running the little ICE engine.
Oct 19th, 2010 (6:24 pm)192 Kdawg said:
Actually EVChel’s partner had never driven a hybrid before.
>b>Some people are good teachers.
Oct 19th, 2010 (6:39 pm)Don’t forget the EPA is making this sticker.
The ones who made me pay approx $100 more per window just reciently because my house was built in 1968 the installers had to test the little strip of paint around my window.. about a 1″ strip of paint might have a little lead in it. Because of this tiny bit of paint that might have lead in it they had to tape up my whole house and put all material in huge plastic bags that gave off a plastic smell that was probably more harmfull than the little bit of paint on the window edge.
We will get the real results as soon as a few thousand people start driving the VOLT and sending in reports.
All they should do is show the MPG for 40 miles 75 miles and 150 miles and be done with it.
Of course the EPA has all our taxpayer easy money so they will spend millions.
Oct 19th, 2010 (6:46 pm)Keep the CO2 scam info off …
We are making wine right now … it is giving off a lot of CO2 during fermentaion.. I guess we are polluting the air with our wine making… the next thing we will have to do is buy carbon credits to make wine… this would be in line with me just paying $100 per window because of a 1″ strip of paint.
This political scam does not belong on the sticker of this car.
-5
Oct 19th, 2010 (6:54 pm)You are right that multiple causes are involved in increasing energy/distance in the winter; I was emphasizing that an ICE car uses ‘waste’ for cabin heating while the EV has to use battery energy. 26 mpg in a Prius, even in the winter would be an extreme case. E.g., seen in a very short drive before the mechanicals warm up. My experience with our Prius is moderate winter (not much snow, 10 – 30F temps) is a 10% mpg hit on the highway, 20% in the city.
-7
Oct 19th, 2010 (7:00 pm)WOP comes out of the closet, posting Prius trash on a Volt website.
TROLL !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Oct 19th, 2010 (7:01 pm)203 pjkPa
We are making wine right now … it is giving off a lot of CO2 during fermentaion.. I guess we are polluting the air with our wine making
A lot of trees are breathing easier because of your winemaking.
-3
Oct 19th, 2010 (7:12 pm)The EPA has produced over the years probably the most ignored, distrusted
and pointless label on any product. And remember, the EPA assumes (like the FDA, IRS, etc)
ZERO responsibility as to its accuracy. The cannot be sued either for liabilityor to have the label changed. You see, the Feds are beyond control of the courts, etc.
You’d think anyone over the age of seven would know to publish figures on electric mileage,
in terms of kilowatts, which is what an electric motor consumes, and on mileage while using
the gasoline engine for power. Why has the EPA managed to avoid the obvious for over a year now? Because we are dealing with Fed bureaucrats, naturally. If they are trying to find a formula equating kilowatts to gasoline, they are on a fool’s mission. They can either be equated in terms of energy provided or cost. But any cost relationship between kilowatts and gasoline
is fatuous. There is no economic connection between the two and they vary , enormously, as can be easily seen by electric rates that vary fourfold and more between the states.
Equating on the basis of energy is, well, pointless. And we use about 7 different fuels to make grid electricity.
We also note the ridiculously pessimistic electric range their label claims, the conditions under which it was obtained not mentioned. Transparency has never been the EPA’s style. It still isn’t. Remember when they discovered 10 years later that their mileage tests were off by 25 percent and more? They never said what city driving really means, nor the vehicle speed or terrain characterized their “highway driving” conditions. Since most folks drive most during rush hour,
they conveniently forgot to estimate that universal situation. See what happens when the govt undertakes a simple task? And they’ve been at it for 35 years or more. And they can’t be fired.
+3
Oct 19th, 2010 (7:13 pm)Your lack of understanding of reality and inability to do even the slightest research to confirm your assertions is astounding. First of all. I started from the energy delivery point to the car to have the only apples for apples comparison. The gas does not spontaneously appear in the gas stations tanks any more than the electricity originates at the outlet.
What is the efficiency of a modern combined cycle plant? What is a modern coal plant’s efficiency? What is a Nuclear, solar, wind generation (does it even matter for these)?
Do you have a clue how much waste heat is actually utlilized for heating?
The energy equation is not close, not by a long shot?
http://www.teslamotors.com/goelectric/efficiency
+3
Oct 19th, 2010 (7:27 pm)LOL (never been called a Troll before)
But it was not my intention to “trash” the Prius at all.
It is what it is, and does what it does, very well in fact.
(and my post was merely to insure accuracy to those Volt fans here wishing/willing to compare paths of power in the gearsets between the two)
The PHEV version? Well IMO it’s merely a Toyota stop-gap measure until they can deliver something with much more true EV capability.
We’ve yet to hear what the collaboration with Tesla will really bring to the table, should be interesting
WopOnTour
PS> and thanks Nasaman for your kind words
+2
Oct 19th, 2010 (7:36 pm)Ok, take 2.2 miles off of the average Lyle posted – call it 48 then. That’s 20% better than what GM was shooting for.
-4
Oct 19th, 2010 (7:39 pm)http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epa/epat5p3.html
CHP does better, of course. What fraction of the US electricity energy supply is CHP ? Do you have any clue ?
+5
Oct 19th, 2010 (7:40 pm)As the good news about the Volt keeps coming the trolls collective voice gets more and more shrill & you are sounding like a dolphin now….
Oct 19th, 2010 (7:56 pm)This is rediculous. Its simple. the sticker should say
40 miles (or whatever) electric mode based on EPA cycle
38mpg (or whatever) gas only based on EPA cycle
forget MPG equivelent – this is stupid!!!! Im tired of this crap!! gallons per 100 miles much better measure anyway as mpg is flawed but again dont even need this. just the two measurments above. Stop the maddness!!!!
Ottawa Canada
-3
Oct 19th, 2010 (7:57 pm)Any more “good news” and this site will implode.
-2
Oct 19th, 2010 (8:00 pm)Pretty much, just include how many kwh are consumed for the range, and an estimate of charge losses for level1 and level2 home chargers.
-5
Oct 19th, 2010 (8:03 pm)It is said that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
-2
Oct 19th, 2010 (8:08 pm)Like the first generation of Volt, eh?
Every vehicle improves over time.
-1
Oct 19th, 2010 (8:47 pm)Several posts have suggested the Volt transmission is more efficient than the Prius PHV. But the test PHV gets 50+ MPG highway, whereas the Volt gets less than 40 MPG. It is hard to imagine that the Prius ICE is that much more efficient that it can overcome a significant deficiency in transmission efficiency. I think the transmissions will prove to be very close in efficiency, and even the ICE advantage will turn out to be not that big. The Prius 400 lb advantage explains part of it, but there must be more to this story if the data turns out to be valid.
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (8:53 pm)LOL– there you go again, putting logic and facts before emotion…there’s no place for that here…save it for the engineering forum!!! Beside, I’d venture a beer that the trolls don’t know the difference between a ring, a sun and a sphincter!!!
+2
Oct 19th, 2010 (9:13 pm)So…does that back up your statement? Well, it would appear closer if 100% of US generation was from coal (about 33% efficient for coal and 41% for gas) but only about 45% is from coal. 23% is natural gas and 1% from petroleum. The rest of our electricity comes from nuclear, hydro, and other non-polluting and/or renewable sources. There are a lot of losses and math involved but it works out to about 60% more efficient for the useful energy consumption for the Volt vs the best ICE car (hybrid or otherwise) if 100% of the electricity comes from coal and 100% better if it comes from gas. For my concerns, the rest of the power generating sources are irrelevent for this metric so the effective improvement is even better. The long term benefits of electricity derived transportation vs gasoline powered is a lopsided debate.
+4
Oct 19th, 2010 (9:20 pm)So now that its shown that the Volt can drive on electricity alone for 40+ (sometimes 60) miles, it is now evil and wrong to use electricity?
Wow, you guys are running out of straws to grasp.
Oct 19th, 2010 (9:31 pm)Is the Gas Only fuel economy mixed CTY/HWY?
-6
Oct 19th, 2010 (9:44 pm)Hogwash. Show me one reputable link. As you should know by know, multiple references from the DOE, ORNL, and UC Davis have all pointed out the same obvious fact, that EV charging is close to 100% fossil fuel based, although the ratio of coal/NG varies by region. Honestly, it has taken Volt fans 4 years to realize that their car is a hybrid. Why should I expect any quicker uptake on simple energy realities.
Let me leave you with an arithmetic exercise:
If 0.6 of source is coal at 33% efficiency and 0.4 of source is NG at 41% efficiency, how much does the weighted efficiency differ from the ~ 36% obtained in a Prius ? Remember, you are the dimwit who posted “Your lack of understanding of reality and inability to do even the slightest research to confirm your assertions is astounding.”
-4
Oct 19th, 2010 (9:49 pm)For the reasons you gave, that’s persuasive. However, it’s also damning. It seems like GM cheaped out and went with a premium fuel requirement to address power and “economy” requirements, rather than building an Atkinson engine.
Cheaping out a $41K compact car that’s supposed to showcase technical leadership… that has GM written all over it.
+1
Oct 19th, 2010 (10:24 pm)At least GM didn’t use those cheap Toyota brakes. Oh!.. too soon?
-4
Oct 19th, 2010 (11:03 pm)What cheap Toyota brakes are those? Mine have lasted over 75K miles.
Oct 19th, 2010 (11:15 pm)Oh, the site is just fine. You, on the other hand, appear well on your way to needing a defibrillator.
Oct 19th, 2010 (11:20 pm)RUFKM, 36% is max eficiency out of the engine. Ave might be 25% used but that would be exceptionally high. The grid generation numbers come from your source which happens to be the same source I’ve given in the past (http://www.eia.gov/cneaf/electricity/epm/epm_sum.html). California will get by far, more Volts than any other state and they get 62% of their electricity from fossil fuels (46% from gas). 100% from fossil fuels, puulease. That is a load of crap no matter how you slice or how capacity can reasonably be expected to be added.
You have to have your hands over your eyes and your fingers in your ears to not know of studies that speak to the benefits of plug-ins. Here’s the executive summary for the first one that came up in a search http://mydocs.epri.com/docs/CorporateDocuments/SectorPages/Portfolio/PDM/PHEV-ExecSum-vol1.pdf.
-4
Oct 20th, 2010 (1:51 am)Sold mine at 118,185 miles, still using the original brakes.
+1
Oct 20th, 2010 (3:08 am)kdawg,
Of course not – I personally would advocate electrification of transportation. The point I was making is that we should not treat electricity as a free resource – we should understand the fossil fuel impact of that electricity usage.
I don’t much care whether we measure that in mpge, J/km, kWh/km, or anything else as long as it’s possible to compare the figures with a gas powered car. That way everyone can make an informed choice
Of course this is going to vary quite considerably between countries… for example in France their electrical power is 80% nuclear. There’s obviously an even better case for the EV over there than in the US / UK.
Back on the turbo (sorry I can’t help it!) – somebody said “turbo only helps efficiency at high power”. This may be the case for the Cruze LT, but it’s not a fundamental. That’s the way they traded off the design for cruze, but the other example I gave (BMW 320d ED) has great highway mileage for a 2l diesel – even though it has more power available than the cruze. I suspect the difference (in terms of whether the turbo is helping at highway speeds) may come down to something like whether the turbo has variable vanes (for wider operating range) or not.
-1
Oct 20th, 2010 (9:07 am)Wrong or right is a judgement call, but without doubt EV is not a panacea. It decreases foreign oil consumption and shifts combustion out of urban areas, but when grid sourced has minimal if any GHG benefit and increased Sox and Nox emissions compared to a standard Prius.
These are not straws, they are reality. You may find it soothing to try and condense the EV question into a single bullet point you can embrace, but the world is not that simple.
+1
Oct 20th, 2010 (9:32 am)You are generalizing regional areas that overwhelmingly use coal-fired generation. There are many other regions which use a grid fuel mix that is relatively low in carbon intensity and pollution for EVs compared to conventional gasoline car use. Texas uses lots of natural gas which releases only 60% the amount of carbon versus coal, generates very little other pollution, and can be used in highly efficient generation plants. They also use a significant and growing amount of wind energy.
Yes, the environmental benefits of EV use in coal-dominated Kentucky and West Virginia might be dubious if you buy regular grid power there but the story is very different in other areas. The national average grid power is now down to 45% coal. It is less than 10% in Northern California (and probably SoCal also). Some cities like Seattle, I think, are 100% hydro power and large areas of some Western states like Idaho are also dominated by hydro power.
There is no single magic answer to our energy, pollution, and global warming problems. We need to identify multiple routes to better energy use and apply all of them together in parallel where they make sense in order to succeed.
-2
Oct 20th, 2010 (9:34 am)I like EPRI, but you should understand they are a lobby of the utility companies. Do you read source scientific literature — ever ? Try the Davis and ORNL articles for a start. I’ll repost (again) the links if you have trouble finding them.
As for the 36% ICE combustion number, understand that I was not thinking of the GM Malibu, but the most efficient ICE alternative available — the Prius. That car has a max BSFC of 38%, and *averages* around 35% efficiency. EPRI is right that the US fleet ICE efficiency is pathetic, but that is not the point.
If you want a back of the envelope calc to convince yourself of average Prius ICE efficiency, start with 250 wh/mile average consumption, 34.5 kwh/gallon, and 45-50 mpg.
-2
Oct 20th, 2010 (9:55 am)Jeff, California is I think the best regional case for EV. There, EV GHG is 85 – 90% of Prius GHG; in the NE and mid-west EV is worse, and about the same for other areas. The studies I have read from the federal science labs and from national universities come to very similar conclusions — namely the rather obvious result that marginal electricity generation is fossil fuel based. Here is a sample:
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/03/ornl-study-expl.html
“In both of the 2020 scenarios and the night scenario in 2030, CO2 emissions are higher with PHEVs than with efficient HEVs. Coal and oil generation is sufficient to raise CO2 emissions higher than if the vehicles had used gasoline. However, in the 2030 2 kW evening scenario, CO2 emissions are lower, because higher-efficiency combined cycle plants and gas-fired turbines with relatively low emissions are used to meet the added demand.
Even though NOx emissions at first calculation are much higher for much of the country, these will be offset by reductions elsewhere. Even though new power plants are very clean, the plants that are on the margin and are run because of the extra demand may actually be older plants with higher emissions. SO2 emissions are likewise positive, but will be offset by reductions elsewhere in the electric system because of the legal caps on total emissions.”
-2
Oct 20th, 2010 (10:11 am)Here is a summary graph from 2009 work at UC Davis looking at California near-term grid use:
http://bioage.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c4fbe53ef0128768cb592970c-popup
HV is set at 46 mpg, which I think most Prius drivers would agree is the low side of actual driving results, and yet is only slightly above PHEV40 aka Volt GHG results. If HV is set at 50 mpg then it approaches the GHG benefit of pure EV.
Later Davis and ORNL studies actually conclude that a larger EV/HV ratio leads to *greater* emissions, not less.
-2
Oct 20th, 2010 (10:37 am)Koz and others,
Start with this paper:
http://pubs.its.ucdavis.edu/download_pdf.php?id=1145
Pay particular attention to Figure 2.3, and realize that out-of-state purchases are for the most part coal sourced.
Oct 20th, 2010 (4:12 pm)Thanks for the pointer to the study. I hadn’t read this one previously. I skimmed it quickly during lunch…..
So, in other words, NOx and SO2 are irrelevant nationally because any increases are offset elsewhere (although there may still be local impacts downwind of the power plants).
And, yes, the marginal electricity generation is fossil fuel based but the charts for most of the regional grid areas show that the marginal generation caused by plugin vehicles is actually less carbon intense than the baseline generation (more NG, less coal).
This study has some questionable assumptions baked into it. It uses an EPRI maximal estimate that 25% of all passenger vehicles (including SUVs) will be plugins in 2020 and that by that time there will be 19 million plugins on the road in the U.S. That seems pretty dubious (some question Obama’s goal of 1 million by 2015). The study also assumes that between 2020 and 2030 there will be a substantial increase in coal generation in most areas of the country but NG generation will see only a slight increase.
I didn’t see any details on how they were calculating the efficiency of the electric aspect of their PHEV model although I assume it is documented in there somewhere. A Chevy Volt is more accurately modeled as a pure EV for the first 40 miles but their PHEV model assumes a mix of battery and gasoline consumption, I think. That wouldn’t be accurate for the use patterns of many Volt customers.
The distribution of EV customers around the country is also likely to be uneven with many more along the West Coast where electricity is low in carbon intensity and relatively few in Midwestern, central Western (Utah, Colorado), and Southern areas where coal use is high.
Where I live in Northern California, the carbon intensity is particularly low and by my calculation is at least half the CO2 of a Prius based on the average PG&E generation fuel mix.
Oct 20th, 2010 (4:16 pm)I think the Volt is more accurately modeled as an EV for 40 miles and then a 40 MPG HEV after that so the BEV entry in the chart is more relevant and shows a substantial improvement. I didn’t parse this graphic in enough detail to see what calculation they were using for BEV efficiency.
Oct 20th, 2010 (4:31 pm)The numbers in the link I gave include out of state generation. A lot of it is coal and a lot of it is hydro from Oregon and Washington, but no new sources will be coal in-state or out of state according to current CA regulations.
Oct 20th, 2010 (4:36 pm)The coal purchases are only a small part of the overall fuel mix.
I noticed that they assume that an EV gets 2.6 miles per Kwh. That’s probably too pessimistic for a Volt. I assume that includes inefficiencies in charging the battery. I think 3.12 miles per KWh or 300 Wh per mile is more realistic for now and we will soon have better measurements of actual wall socket Watt hours per mile from the CAB and early customers.
Of course, many Volt and other EV customers already have or will be inspired to install solar panels and some major population centers of the country would clearly benefit from grid-based EV use so national grid-based studies like these don’t automatically speak to whether EVs are always good, bad or neutral from a pollution perspective (CO2 included). EVs are good on any of these regional grids from the perspective of reducing imported oil.
Oct 20th, 2010 (5:26 pm)But are a large fraction of marginal demand, which is where EVs live unless they get folded into night time charging schemes in which case coal use goes up even further.
I am not anti-EV by any means, I just wish people would be better informed and not take polly-anna stands on complex issues.
Oct 20th, 2010 (6:42 pm)In comment 236 you said: “Pay particular attention to Figure 2.3, and realize that out-of-state purchases are for the most part coal sourced.”
If you are referring to figure 2 in section 2.3 in the UC Davis study showing “System Imports” satisfying a large part of the marginal peak (daytime) demand, you should look at the definition of that term in section 2.1 where it says “System Imports” consist of NWImports (46% NG, 50% Hydro, 4% coal) and SWImports (96% NG, 4% coal).
The only case I see them talking about increasing coal in imported electricity is for the extreme case of fuel cell cars running on hydrogen locally generated from inefficiently splitting lots of water. That case isn’t relevant to an EV or gasoline PHEV discussion.
Oct 20th, 2010 (8:05 pm)I vote for two numbers as the rating: The expected miles travelled on battery, and the miles per gallon after that as a hybrid.
Oct 20th, 2010 (9:24 pm)Right you are, I stand corrected. A different UC Davis study concluded that system imports was coal sourced from the southwest US. And I would not be surprised if the SW imports were into S. California — so now we are talking about sub-region variation.
I’m happy to continue analyzing this article with you, because I think it is one of the best available and extremely informative. However, do we in general agree that best case for grid EV is NG and worse case coal, with the the greater majority of consumers somewhere in-between ? This is my only point I care to emphasize, so that people stop using national grid mix as a surrogate for EV GHG.
Oct 23rd, 2010 (2:59 am)I do not typically feed-back, though actually do love your web site – so thank you for posting and also have a wonderful evening
Oct 28th, 2010 (4:14 pm)Why is it so complicated to state mpg? As a consumer I just want to know how far am I going to roll this car before my full tank of gas and my fully charged battery are both empty?