Featured Justify a hybrid

So once again, the skeptics speak:

Source: It’s Getting Harder to Justify a Hybrid | TheDetroitBureau.com

If you’re picking a new car, truck or crossover based on the bottom line, you may be in for a surprise, according to a new study. While hybrids tend to deliver better mileage than comparable gasoline-powered vehicles, you may actually wind up spending more in the long run.

Less than one out of four of the 29 hybrids covered by consulting firm Vincentrie’s U.S. Hybrid Ownership study actually had lower costs than comparable gas-powered models. Lower pump prices are certainly a factor, but other issues play into the equation – notably including the fact that the fuel efficiency of non-hybrid vehicles has been fast on the rise.​

We've seen this before and once again:
Hybrid Analysis 2016

In most cases studied, the hybrid vehicle had a higher market price than its closest all-gasoline-powered alternative, which causes several cost factors to increase including depreciation, finance, opportunity costs and fees and taxes. The analysis shows that in approximately one quarter of the cases, fuel cost savings associated with hybrid vehicles are able to offset their price premium. However, hybrids are becoming less cost-effective as they lose their competitive edge due to the improved fuel economy of gas-powered combustion engines and falling fuel prices. Ultimately, it’s important for consumers to look at their needs and the specific models available to them because depending on the negotiated price, driving patterns and intended length of ownership, a hybrid can still be a great value. ​

Bob Wilson

 

Worse, they compared both a Level 2 Prius (not ECO) and the Prius v to the same Corolla. <AAAGGGGGHHHH!!!!!>

As a general rule of thumb, such comparisons in the past have been terribly flawed. Too many 'cherry picked' Apples-to-Onions are found when the data is examined. The most common mistake is standard alloy wheels on the Prius and steel pieces of sh*t. We saw even worse examples with the old "Dust-to-Dust" report.

I don't post about such flawed reports in admiration but rather as a 'vaccination' so when we run into relatives or co-workers who drag out these sorry excuses for research, we can quickly answer,

• 'They used the same Toyota Corolla to compare to different Prius models, the bottom line hatchback, not the highest mileage one, and the Prius station wagon, the Prius v.'
• 'The one that showed a Lexus CT 200h saved $8,700 over the gas version?'

Last decade, these faux, comparison articles were pretty popular. But once you started loading the gasser with the options that are standard on the hybrid, the results often reversed. Sad to say, I have yet to figure out a 'magic bullet' to get fact based versions.

Bob Wilson

 

It is a complex problem because we all don't drive the same number of miles per year. In Huntsville, I'm running about 325-350 miles per week, 17-18k miles per year. I'm on the high-side of typical miles per year used in these flawed studies, 12-15k. For example, if someone is only driving say 7k miles per year, it doesn't matter what car is bought as your annual fuel savings are 'small change.'

Thanks to the BMW i3-REx I've had to revisit how to calculate the direct fuel-electricity costs. We still have a 52 MPG, 2010 Prius, so how to compare the two. So I am leaning towards:

Inputs:

1. $/gallon
2. $/kWh
3. vehicle

Output:

1. $/10_miles - it seems to easily covert for both commuting and cross country metrics

​

Fortunately, there is a full data file at: Download Fuel Economy Data

This data does not include the purchase and depreciation numbers that "ViNCENTRiC" used. However, we may be able to get usable purchase and depreciation numbers from the Idaho National Labs data: INL

So I'm thinking about designing an experiment, a model, that uses:

• Idaho National Labs - depreciation and identification of vehicle model/year for study ... selecting
• www.fueleconomy.gov - to find a matching vehicle by interior volume and cost $/10_miles
• USA Energy Information Administration - three numbers, average and +/- 1 standard deviation, for fuel and electricity

This would be an 'open source' as all of the data would be from USA government sources. It would be limited to the makes and models tested at INL but that would be a heck of a lot more open than anything else out there. Let me share an example using "place-holder" numbers:

	make	model	$1.50/gal	$0.10/kwh	$1.80/gal	$0.20/kWh	$2.25/gal	$0.30kWh
1	BMW	i3-REx	$0.35/10_mi	$0.25/10_mi	$0.40/10_mi	$0.30/10_mi	$0.60/10_mi	$0.50/10_mi
2	Chevy	Volt	$0.37/10_mi	$0.27/10_mi	$0.43/10_mi	$0.34/10_mi	$0.70/10_mi	$0.60/10_mi
3

This is just some initial design ideas but it may be a static analysis doesn't work. The table becomes too complex. Instead, it may lead to a web form that you put in the numbers and the assumptions based upon closest matching metrics leads to a result. Sometimes a table can become too complex and a graph something only the author likes.

Regardless, I don't like these comparison studies because they too easily fall into 'simplify the problem' traps, the back-of-the-envelope problem.

Bob Wilson

 

My thinking is some sort of weighted average or possibly RMS:

• 50% - internal volume
• 30% - power
• 20% - weight(?), seats(?)

Due to mixed units (i.e., ft{3}, hp, lbs, seats), this is a case where converting to percentages can map the metrics into a common scale. Something to experiment with until a more sensible matching mechanism can be found. Nice problem to 'over think.'

BTW, I won't try to keep them clustered by manufacture. I'd rather see the most closely matched vehicles and their cost/10_mile, the operational cost. Then we can play the capital vs operational cost game (which it is!)

Bob Wilson