Anyone waiting for PIP getting the "itch" to consider a Chevy Volt instead?

Totally agree that the map of total hybrid sales is correlated to population which is why in my first post (http://priuschat.com/forums/chevrolet-volt/showpost.php?p=1472345&postcount=181) about the correlation I used percentage of car sales in regions. But as giora was asking about "average" GHG emissions then the actual count of what is where matter a lot. The combination of more people and higher hybrid adoption rates makes the total impact even higher which is reflected in the total counts.

 

This probably belongs to another forum but I couldn't resist...:

Darrell can claim his house-hold is Carbon-free only if he is self-sustained and isolated from the local grid near him.
Connected to the grid, he is making his local grid a bit cleaner by becoming one of the generation sources of this grid, but not more than that. Once connected, he cannot claim he is using green electrons while his neighbor using dirtier electrons.
If you are connected to the system, you become part of it for better or worse.
That is, at least, is my perception.

 

I would not agree .. they might be adjusted by the weighted average of the energy exchanged, but not the raw carbon production in each. The interconnection allows energy exchange, but need not actually exchange.

And exchanges are directional, If Texas is exporting excess wind energy into CO that does not make Tx any dirtier, but does make CO cleaner.

Since I did not agree above, I don't agree here either. The national average is the EASIEST to use, but that does not make it right or the only viable value. A consumer buys from THEIR power provider. Right now a local region, or a special purchase agreement is the consumer's best data.

I agree it is hard, however, to know what is exchanged into/out of your region. Its hard than it should be to tract the green-power for which I pay extra. But the tracking is beging to do a better job, such as in the regional green house gas exchange (http://rggi.org/)

 

On second thought, I have decided to remove my am post.
Probably this crossed your answer as when I removed it it was still last post in the thread.
Sorry for inconvenience caused.

Giora.

 

This topic has been discussed before at great length. Your argument fails because electricity is fungible. There is no such thing as "green" and "dirty" electrons. Electrons are indistinguishable one from another, and in fact, the electrons pushed from the power plant never reach your house. What reaches your house is a voltage wave resulting from electrons pushing on each other.

A person who installs any form of green power generation can claim "green creed" for having done so. In fact (and this is the context in which the topic arose before) you could install PVs that generate green electricity during the day and push it onto the grid when demand is high, and then charge your car at night from the grid when demand is low, and still call your car carbon-free. This is because electricity is fungible. If you use only as much as you produce, you are green in your power consumption. Furthermore, in the above case, you are BETTER than carbon-free because the above scenario is "peak-shaving." You are REDUCING the need to run the public power plant at higher levels, or build more power plants, during peak times, and you are using electricity at off-peak times when the generators are running at a minimum level, where they would be run anyway. This is why some power companies offer lower rates for off-peak usage: It is good for the grid to shift usage from peak to off-peak times. A grid-tied PV system that feeds power to the grid at peak times and draws back at off-peak times is exactly what is needed to provide maximum environmental benefit, as long as we have non-sustainable power generation happening.

There were one or two people here who took your position, but I categorically reject it. To summarize: Because electricity is fungible there is no such thing as "green" or "dirty" electrons; just green or dirty power generation, and as long as you are generating energy cleanly, you can claim that much carbon-free usage, as long as you don't sell green credits for your power to someone else. (And selling green credits is not the same as trading daytime power for nighttime power.)

 

I can agree to this.
As for the rest, let's agree to disagree on most of it.

BTW In Israel, if you install PV system on your roof, you must sell all production to the electric company (it is a separate meter). You are paid with a bonus (covered by government to encourage such installations).

P.S. I do not even know what 'fungible' means! so surely I am not claiming electricity is something I don't know its meaning... all I said was that Darrell cannot claim his electricity is cleaner than his neighbor's.

 

Fungible means that one unit of something is indistinguishable from another. Once the electricity is produced, "dirty" electricity looks and acts exactly the same as "clean" electricity.

And while Darrell cannot claim his electricity is cleaner than anyone else's, he can claim that his carbon footprint is zero because he is producing as much electricity cleanly as he is consuming. (Assuming those numbers balance. I don't actually know if Darrell ends up using more or less than he produces.)

 

Daniel is in the right here when describing it as clean electricity. That even allows you to have clean electricity in a place that doesn't support it. You could pay to install PVs in AZ when you live in NY and rightfully claim the carbon offset since they would otherwise not exist. However with local criteria pollutants such as PM and SO2 this is a bit more touchy.

 

Well now that the EPA data is known.. people will start to decide based on data not uncertainity. I see lots selling in CA for hov access without a place to actually plug in. (i.e. treat it as a HV). But at least the wife of one poster (Pipcecil) over at the leaf forum found the EV range too limited.
My Nissan Leaf Forum • View topic - Toyota Prius PHEV

 

You need to be careful with any average assumption. EVs will add to electricity use and therefore be marginal. It's the marginal effect that matters.

For example, our electricity (Central Maine Power) mix is here:
http://www.cmpco.com/MediaLibrary/3/6/Content%20Management/Suppliers%20And%20Partners/PDFs%20and%20Doc/DisclosureLabel.pdf

But if I bought a PEV (I wish) I couldn't say "I'm using 30% Hydro" because presumably it's already being used. Maybe charging at night I'd be on spare nuclear, or an NG peaker or even spare coal capacity. And the effect on a peaker is hard to quantify because my additional use could affect the efficiency.

 

I ordered my PHV with the assumption of a 15 mile EV range. Toyota now states a 11 mile EV range. What really matters is the blended mileage for each persons real world driving patterns. It will be interesting to get real world stats from members of this forum.

 

Stay tuned, it won't take long for the reality of what the MPG boost delivers to stir lots of interest.
.

 

in
WA, solar is "green" power and it has nothing to do with clean, its green like money. WA provides HUGE PROFIT incentives for solar installs here to the point that even in an area of 7 months of perpetual clouds, many can easily see a payback in 7-10 years.

i have one guy who is estimating a payback of 12 years and he

1) has obstructed roof so full sun only for part of the day

2) installed his 5 years ago (if done today he would have paid almost half as much due to large drop in panel prices)

3) charges 2 NEVs and supplies power for him, wife, child and 2 grandchildren in 3300 sq ft home. only non electrical appliance he has is water heater. home heat is combo gas/electric (additions built several years ago use electric)

total power bill for 2011; $48 (this is first bill he has had since solar install but also first full year with daughter living with him)

best year was 2009. he banked over $1700

 

funny, i thought it was the EPA that made that statement

 

What is your commute like? Where were you planning to use the EV miles?

 

Nope.. The data was computed by Toyota.. following the EPA guidelines.
The EPA does not yet have a Prius PHV page.

 

John (?),

I think we're going to be seeing a lot of MPG figures, hopefully, actual from gallons refilled, miles driven. And that's great, but...

as we see the MPGs go up, so will the total electrical usage during that tank.

Help me out folks....

How can an owner track the actual electrical energy used from the wall from the beginning of filling up to the end?

Also, is it feasible to state, for example .... I got

xx MPGs at xx kWHrs/mile

One figure seems to only make sense when tagged to the other.

or do you even care about the kWhrs/mile rate? Or you just look at total kWhrs consumed? Or look at the total electrical bill?

Help!!

 

I think dave was referring to the other stuff, which amounted to YMMV. The blended mode charge depletion range and gas usage depend much on how you use it Toyota did a good job decreasing the amount the amount of gas the prius phv uses while in blended mode, from the demo fleet. The removal of preheating on electricity will reduce cd range for those in cold climates though. Temperture, distance, acceleration/deceleration, speed all are need to figure out how much gas you will use. With the low capacity of the battery these swings will be dramatic.

 

Different people will care about different thing. Most phev owners to date don't care at all how many kwh they are consuming. They care about how little gas they use. Put it this way, for me the prius phv would cost about $0.30 to fill the battery for the day with wind, its kind of a rounding error compared to market gyrations, $100 a year. Electrical efficiency matters more, since it lets you know how far that full charge will take you. On a bev where you might use a lot more electricity, the rate/efficiency may make more of a difference. In hawaii or indiana, this may be different as in the first you are really burning expensive oil based electricity, and in indiana mainly polluting coal. Most phev care about using lesss gas and/or less pollution. Those that care about less pollution will likely find less polluting sources of electricity.

 

now its 6 miles