Featured Real-World Electric Vehicle Fueling Costs May Surprise New EV Drivers

But how many hybrids can get that fuel economy, and still be something people want to buy? The 'compact' SUV is one of the most popular segments, and the Rav4 hybrid's combined MPG is 40. The midsize sedans replaced by those SUVs get close to that 49mpg, but only beat it with fuel saving trims. Hybrid versions of larger SUVs, minivans, and pick ups can save alot of gas in comparison to the ICE models, but are far from that 49mpg target here.

Getting everyone to switch to a hybrid would help, but we can't convince many Americans that they would be fine with a smaller vehicle. There is now a hybrid option for every major car segment, yet hybrids are still just a tiny slice of new car sales. The public has done math similar what we are doing here, and have decided that hybrids aren't worth the upfront cost to the fuel savings.

Well, you won't be seeing much more of a reduction, but most people won't be starting from such a point. It would be great if they went to a Prius, Prime or otherwise, but the sales figures says they aren't. More are choosing a Model 3 or Y, and in most of the country, they'll save money on fuel compared to the repaced car, and emit far less emissions than even a hybrid.

Who is claiming otherwise?

 

Depends where you live.

If you are stuck in a thermal inversion layer you need both

the trouble is that in hot climates further reducing manmade NOX is having zero affect on smog because unintentional VOC emissions from mainly stationary objects (that nobody seems to care about) is high enough to allow naturally created ozone to also form smog all by itself. The trouble is that cars are no longer the largest source here.

Outside large cities and even in many cities during cold climates it could be strongly argued that reducing fuel use and CO2 at all costs no matter what the “emissions “ is far more prudent since the supply side makes far more pollution creating and delivering your gallon of fuel than your car ever could and NOX in those conditions is unlikely to form smog and high ground level ozone.

Add to this we have an unspoken solid waste and material supply issues from all fronts meaning we should do everything possible to reduce spent materials in products including cars.

Historically there were 1900lb carbon fiber underpowered suburban sized vehicles made as proof of concept for a vehicle that could get 50mpg at city speeds (highway not so much)

We don’t have the will to make a vehicle like I described because to be profitable the dies would need to be used 20+ years, (car makers like to change bodies every 3-6 years) people wouldn’t like the underpowered part either but perhaps hybridization could partially solve the issue.

For either goal…
Unless energy prices skyrocket or Without unpopular progressive or downright punitive taxation against specific types of AWD land barges and excessive energy use you won’t see consumers motivated to change anything, let alone commercial entities and wasteful commercial practices of deliver everything by semi ASAP trends .
In other words exactly the opposite of what we do today.
You need a smaller carrot and a bigger stick.

 

Saved this chart several years ago so that it would be easier to understand fueling equivalencies;


.

 

Holy mackerel 105 posts! Touched a EV-advocates nerve, as usual

What I would always point out, is for gasoline cars and hybrids, we know exactly how much real-world energy they use, for example, from Fuelly.com. EV's we have no Fuelly.com equivalent (since Elon keeps his Tesla data secret) so we have typically been using optimistic numbers for EV power use. I bet if we knew how much energy those Tesla's were actually using, it might be surprising.

 

The adoption of plug ins have been going faster than that of hybrids. Market share for hybrids in the US has been stagnant for years. It peaked around the time of Prius popularity, and has been dropping with those sales to around 2%, and that likely includes the mild hybrid Ram trucks. Plug in market share has been steadily growing since their introduction. Hybrids only provided fuel efficiency, and many figured the pay back time with US gas prices for the hybrid premium. Plug ins give efficiency and performance, which is something buyers rarely looked into for pay back times.

PHEVs are always an option for those not ready to ditch the ICE.

Plug ins are expensive because they are the new thing, that will change in time. Hybrid system costs have dropped since the Prius came out. The very first cars were only affordable to the wealthy. Even ones made by Ford before he founded the Ford Motor Company.

Agree that switching to hybrid can reduce much of the emissions, but US gas prices are too cheap to get buyers to switch en mass. You need manufacturers that are willing to give up some profit to move them. Toyota did it with the Rav4h here, but didn't with the Corollah. With the Maverick, Ford is using a modified plan from the Lincoln Zypher(I think that's the model), which was same price for hybrid or ICE. The Maverick just skips on having a smaller ICE base option. Both require upgrading to the 'bigger' ICE to get AWD.

Plug ins won't remain the exclusive property of the wealthy. Energy costs in Europe already have some BEVs cheaper to own than a comparable ICE car.

Reduction is good, but we can push hybrids and plug ins at the same time. Policies that encourage people to switch to hybrid will also push them to plug ins.

There are Bolts and Teslas on Fuelly. Since the site doesn't allow entry of kWh units, there is no telling exactly what the users are entering. PHEV entries are just as useless as Fuelly doesn't support dual fuel, and the users ignore electricity used.
Chevrolet Bolt EV MPG - Actual MPG from 22 Chevrolet Bolt EV owners
Tesla Mileage Reports | Fuelly

But that doesn't matter. The EPA, WLTP, etc. are standardized tests. As long as you aren't cross comparing them, the biases and flaws of the test will be applied to all models. User submitted sources like Fuelly introduce extra variables that introduces their own issues when used for such studies.

Or are you claiming Tesla cheated on the EPA? What of the other EVs used in these studies? From reviews and outside tests, sounds like the EPA under reported the Taycan's efficiency.

If your route and driving style stay the same, the percentage adjustment to your old car's rating will likely be the same for the new one.

The Prius Prime and Model 3 are efficiency champs. If they are the start point, you will be disappointed in the rest, and there isn't really much point to switch if you already have one and it works for you. They wouldn't work for all, so in a discussion about the bigger picture, you need to remember there are other cars out there.

 

With the recent regulation to raise the minimum mileage in the next couple of years, I suspect most of the manufacturers will be going with hybrids. Toyota has shown that it works for cars, trucks, vans and SUVs. It's been over 20 years since the Prius patents were filed, so I suspect that there is a good chance that the Prius design will be used in some cases.

 

The issue if that the cars that can get 54 mpg are generally lesser cars (to the average person) than those that can get 133 MPGe.
So a table showing the 30 and 40 mpg gas costs should also be included.

I've owned 4 different Prius models over the last 20 years.
Haven't we all seen how few and of the the public will be satisfied with the 54 mpg car?

Mike

 

Of course we all know that perfect is the enemy of good enough.

Sure, but the problem is that if a car has both a plug and a gas tank a large percentage of the population will just be lazy and never or rarely plug it in.
And you still have to maintain the gas engine, do oil changes and support the whole infrastructure for that for an even longer period of time

Mike

 

It is the percentage of your fuel economy in a car to its EPA rating. In the PP, you are getting 120% of EPA in HV. Switch to another hybrid, and you'll very likely get that 120% of its rating. IN EV, you are getting 131%, so should do about as well with another EV.

It's not exact science, but should give people a good estimate of what they can get from any car they are considering to buy.

The Leaf and Volt came out in late 2010 as 2011 model years. The plug in segment is still young. We had far less options in hybrids at this point in their timeline, and some were also expensive. Affordable BEVs will come. It will just take longer for the US with current market conditions.

You are assuming the PHEVs people will buy will be efficient ones, and not power ones. The incentive structure in Europe for PHEVs recently had businesses buying PHEVs without giving the drivers a reason to plug in. The popular PHEVs(Outlander, a BMW SUV) didn't do much better in HV mode than the ICE counterpart.

 

We here are interested in fuel efficiency. Thus our discussions focus on efficient car models, which could lead to us forgetting that inefficient hybrids are a thing. Same with plug ins, but whether that means worse emissions depends on the grid they use.

 

I would like to suggest that any BEV that is significantly less efficient than the front runners is a step back, regardless of what grid they use. A car that uses twice the electricity is wasting power and the resources that are used to create that power. That's energy that could be used to move two cars and batteries, motors, etc that could have built two BEVs.

 

But the reality is that hybrids have been on the market for 20+ years and sales have flattened out.
Reasonable BEVs have been on the market about half as long and sales are accelerating and most every car maker is designing several models.

Mike

 

Efficiency remains a problem with all vehicles. Fortunately battery prices encourages better engineering for engineering led companies. Sad to say, too many companies are run by MBAs (aka., failed freshman engineering students!)

Bob Wilson

 

Let's change it from BEV to plug-in to get more of a honest picture.

The desirable BEVs and PHEVs- all have waiting lists, they can not make enough. Toyota dealers want a huge "market adjustment" for a rav4 prime (my local wanted $5K + required unwanted options), Tesla raised prices, ford sent me an email saying demand for the f150 lightning is so high most that deposited will not be able to buy until 2023 or 2024.

It is not as if people want these cars to save money on gasoline, the vehicles are more desirable than gasoline cars for large segments of the population. Even the prius in its hybrid liftback form is now being outsold by the phev.

The US does need better infrastructure and it is being built, but there is no lack of demand. Factories are still being built to satisfy it.