Featured BBC News: Plug-in hybrids are a 'wolf in sheep's clothing'...

Agreed, there is no way I'm emitting emissions anywhere near that of a regular car and if I am indirectly that is something the state can rectify if it is that big of an issue by generating cleaner electricity.

 

They will be banned from 2030 onwards in some countries, which I also find ridiculous.
There are many ways of making them as friendly as planned by the automakers.

 

The article doesn't specifically test the Prius Prime, so it's hard to judge why Europeans would choose high-priced petrol over electricity. I participate in Ameren Missouri's Community Solar Program, so all of my charging is covered by solar energy. I never use the hybrid mode until I'm out of charge, except for road trips which of course create tailpipe emissions. And I'm sure that by 2030 there will be even more alternative fuels to replace the petroleum component.
The fun electric driving experience in a city assures that I plug it in overnight- I wonder if many Europeans lack a garage? Filling the gas tank for me is a less-than-monthly affair. Here's how I explained it: Driving a Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle – Part 3 – EdTechGuy Opinions Only

 

Well, the PHEVs in the survey are emitting less carbon, thus using less fuel, than the typical hybrid, which includes mild ones. So the drivers are saving on gas compared to what else they might have gotten, and they generally drive less than we do here.

Lack of home charging is part of it, but it seems it's mostly incentives and taxes. people here have bought Primes here because all the incentives meant it was cheaper than a Prius. They may or may not be charging the car. Cars under a certain carbon emission have tax benefits in Europe that might be yearly. Businesses are buying them for that reason, and give them to employees without a care of whether they charge the car or not.

 

No one knows the source of the data, what was actually sampled. So, the survey was basically worthless. It doesn't matter, since the market is changing anyway. RAV4 Prime costs more than RAV4 hybrid even with incentives and it doesn't compare with existing choices.

 

It was an opt in survey of PHEV owners and drivers. As valid and biased as Fuelly, and other such sites. The report very well could have pulled such data from them.

The Rav4 PHV hasn't been released yet in Europe. Price nor CO2 emissions aren't known yet. The hybrid doesn't qualify for favorable taxing because of its CO2 emissions, but the PHV might.

 

Another report on this topic just came out.
PHEV: Real-world consumption 2-4 times higher than approved - electrive.com

One of the parties behind this one is ICCT. West Virginia Tech was working with them when they caught VW cheating on diesel emissions.

 

The title of this report matches my experience with our 2014 BMW i3-REx:

• $2.90/100 miles - in town, 72 mi EV battery pack augmented by 'free' L2 charging
• 4x cost of EV vs gas - inter city cost to and from Nashville TN

So the report is likely accurate and reflects why we would trade-in the 2017 Prius Prime, $18.3k, for our 2019 Std Rng Plus Model 3 Tesla. What a great country that each can make their own choices of where they spend their money.

Bob Wilson

 

That one also misrepresents. You have to carefully read through the information provided to discover what's missing. The omission, which heavily skews how the data is portrayed, becomes evident using some critical thought. It's really sad people are so easily mislead by taking what they see at face value, without question.

This is a rapidly evolving market, but the conclusions are based upon the impression that nothing has changed. Think about how different interpretation of expectation is from just generation to generation. It makes no sense treating them as the same; yet, these studies lump everything together without any consideration of automakers responding to consumer feedback. It is textbook propaganda, especially when it focuses entirely on the technology itself, giving you the impression no other factors have an influence toward consumer behavior.

A simple solution... which is clearly not getting addressed with any of these analysis papers... is to encourage the very behavior they imply we have no influence to change. In other words, help people take advantage of charging opportunities. What should be obvious is to promote time-of-use discounts for overnight recharges. That electricity usage can be tied directly to vehicle consumption. Both provider meters and the EVSE unit itself can be programmed to track that data and report it accordingly as rewards for usage.

 

Can you explain what's missing? I read the article, but it didn't seem too bad.

 

ALL cars even those that are non-hybrid emit far more than “approved” because the tests are semantical only and have little bearing on the real world

 

Ordinarily I'm inclined to agree with @john1701 but we diverge when our personal experience differs:

• December 2016 - we had a 2014 BMW i3-REx and 2017 Prius Prime
• 39 MPG, BMW, vs 56 MPG, Prius Prime - just we found the 25 mi EV range of the Prime made it driveway art. In contrast, the 72 mi EV range BMW was the preferred vehicle around town.
• $6 gas cost vs $24 EV - in a series of Huntsville-Nashville, 120 mi, tests, we found the BMW was cheaper on gas than electricity. So sure, the Prius Prime would be the better choice traveling to and from Nashville but around town, the BMW was the lowest cost option with 3x the EV range.
• $18.3k Prime trade-in for 2019 Std Rng Plus Model 3 - we only put 16k miles on the Prime in the ~2 years of ownership and it had become 'driveway art.' If the 25 mi, Prius Prime EV range and 3.5 kW, L1/L2 only charging meets your requirements ... GREAT! But it didn't for the longer ranges needed in North Alabama.

The 2019 Std Rng Plus Model 3 with L1/L2 and Supercharging fast DC fully meets our city and highway driving requirements. It is cheaper on EV than the BMW and substantially lower price per mile of the Prius Prime. Cross-country travel must follow the growing Supercharger network with occasional, overnight L2 charging with free breakfast. Regardless, the Tesla has fully met our requirements and substantially more affordable on cross country trips.

Now depending upon the charging network, Supercharger or CCS-1, everyone should go in with 'open eyes.' There are people who must have a gasoline network to support their requirements. Requirements are an individual need.

GOOD LUCK!
Bob Wilson

 

Actually, that would be agreeing with me. My point was that the market is evolving and that is not represented or even mentioned in the substance provided. They just gloss over the subject matter as if neither the technology nor the audience ever changes. It's like the opposite of cherry-picking.

 

Um, this is exactly what Fraunhofer and ICCT does among other recommendations,"On the national level, ICCT Director Peter Mock also recommends linking support such as purchase premiums and reduced company car taxation to proof of predominantly electric use in real-world operation. Correspondingly, legal and financial obstacles to home charging stations must give way. At the same time, fleet PHEV incentives could be issued only to companies that provide a sufficient workplace charging infrastructure or support employees in-home or public charging." They also call for policy decisions to use actual usage patterns, and to update the WTLP testing for those patterns.

The ICCT wants to clean up the transportation sector, and they do this by making reasonable, data backed recommendations. They aren't calling for a PHEV ban like Greenpeace and others have done.

Don't hold your breath.

The OT report gave me pause because of Greenpeace's involvement, and such earlier reports lead to blaming PHEVs for not being as carbon reducing asoriginally projected, instead of looking at the testing and incentive policies. This report does the opposite, and this EV site seems to do indepth reporting on it.

If inclined, the actual white paper can be found here: https://theicct.org/publications/phev-real-world-usage-sept2020

That is true, and some governments may consider that when passing regulations. With PHEVs, assumptions on level of EV use has to be made, as they are relatively new to the fleet. The big one is how often the cars will be charged.

The ire PHEVs are getting, mostly in Europe, is because those assumptions were quite off, and the cars are getting some nice incentives for carbon emission levels based on those assumptions.