Someone stop me from going all-electric

1. So long as we are reaching for absurdity, I suggest an i-miev Vs a hybrid bicycle.
2. Any data to support 12 years ? I was being optimistic in saying 10 for an EV's life
3. 25 years is correct for (average over lifetime) full nameplate production for PV
4. I looked up San Diego, with panels tilted at 30 degrees. 1637 kWh annually per kW installed
5. Something is way wrong with your 0.5 lb C02 per kWh figure. Look at NG in the graph below, which is presumably the marginal fuel used (and not the imported electricity made from coal from neighboring states...ahem.) Then account for the ~ 7% transmission losses, and the ~ 15% charging losses. This calculates out to (in Kg C02/kWh) (0.469/0.93)/0.85) = 0.693. Or 1.52 pounds C02 per kWh. For most EVs that are reasonable comparisons to a Prius, the annual average consumption per mile is somewhere in the range of 330 to 400 Wh per mile, thus 0.5 - 0.6 pounds per mile of C02.

 

Per FuelEconomy.gov Prius produces 222g/mi and iMiEV 150g/mi. 72g are 0.16lb, not 0.25lbs. at 12k/year it will amount to 1900lbs and you would need ~$3174 not $5k. Ironically since electricity is more expensive (cost to drive 25mi in iMiEV = $1.42 vs Prius = $1.28 these $3.2k will reduced by another $67/year, for as long as gas stays under $2.80. YMMV

If you wanna bring iMiEV to comparison, lets wait until comparable more efficient ICE vehicle is produced in 2016. The purpose build commuter 84MPG Elio will produce ~132g/mi, well below iMiEV level and at $6800/new it will be no brainer either way you look at it.

 

I think an i (or Leaf, or etc...) versus a Prius is a bit more reasonable than comparing an i to an electric bicycle, or a Prius to the Mercedes EV. With that said, if you want to ride down the highway at 65mph on your EV bicycle, please post a video/pics.

Real world mileage for last gen EVs (from PNGV) was ~100k+ miles, which is comparable to conventional vehicles.
http://www.evchargernews.com/miscfiles/sce-rav4ev-100k.pdf

In addition, manufacturers like Mitsubishi offer an 8-year/100k battery warranty. If a 12+ year lifespan isn't normal and at the edge of the bell curve, they'll be replacing a lot of battery packs over the next five years. They may be doing that, but they probably won't.
2016 i-MiEV / Safety Features & Warranty / Mitsubishi Motors

It's possible that all those 2012 i's will be in the junkyard in 5 years, but existing data/warranty coverage doesn't support that. People said the same thing about the Prius, and we all know how that ended up...

For PV output, an extra ~6% depending on region won't really change the outcome much either. Near term generation is likely majority NG, but using only near-term generation over an EV's 12 (or 10) year lifespan probably isn't accurate. Right now, renewables have ~20+k MW operational and ~10+k MW permitted, so odds are the average and marginal use of NG will continue to drop.
http://www.energy.ca.gov/renewables/tracking_progress/documents/renewable.pdf

In addition, there's a strong correlation between EV ownership and PV panel installation (30-60% over the life of the EV), which further complicates matters. That alone would cut marginal emissions associated with EV adoption substantially.
http://energycenter.org/sites/default/files/docs/nav/transportation/cvrp/survey-results/California_PEV_Owner_Survey_Report.pdf

Ultimately it's a gradual chicken/egg situation. As more people purchase EVs and a larger customer base builds up, more off-peak renewable energy will be built up.

 

Prius Vs LEAF sound right
Except of course OP wants the MB lol

 

You are confusing what people do, and what is the highest Enviro ROI. You also presume that these people would not have put up PV if they had not bought an EV.

2. Prius are easily good for 200k miles if not 300k. Setting their lifetime use to twice an EV is if anything somewhat pessimistic.

So the other way to show that buying EV(s) is a very inefficient (in terms of ROI) use of 'green' dollars is thus: Ignoring car subsidies, an EV is about $35k and a Prius $23k . Since the Prius lasts say 1.5x as long as an EV, over 30 years two Prius have been consumed or three EVs. That is a difference of $59k dollars.

$59k dollars will buy ~ 23kW of installed PV, which over the PV lifetime of 30 years will produce
23*1.65*25 = 966 MWh. About a pound of CO2 from NG is averted for every clean kWh, so the money spent on PV has averted 966,000 pounds of C02 emissions.

In the meantime the EVs have traveled some 300k miles and saved around 0.3 pounds of C02 per mile, thus about 100,000 pounds of C02 emissions averted.

I leave the rest of the exercise to you.

 

This is a loaded question. If performance is measured by CO2 footprint reduction, than PV isn't the best investment. We have cut annual consumption by 4600kWh by adding attic insulation, adding 2nd attic fan, lowE film on several exposed windows, adding vent boosters.. and converting hottub to NG. Total investment less than 1.5k for the total savings 4.6*30=138mWh or 138,000lbs of CO2.

Also it is ironic that people living in coastal CA with good weather almost all year around buying 20-50k EV, where 6k motorcycle will provide greater CO2 footprint reduction, access to HOV and additional time savings impossible in for non-2-wheelers. I lost several hours trying to get out of SF to Santa Rosa in rush hour, looking with awe at bike riders filtering btw the cars.

 

1. We don't even have an attic. Cathedral ceilings in my house. I believe current code requires R50 insulation in Canada anyway. (Mine isn't R50 I'm sure, but it would be an enormous expense to update them to that.)

2. I had a motorcycle licence at one point. They can be fun, but emergency docs call them donorcycles for a good reason.

 

Absolutely! There is usually a lot of conservation that should precede PV.

 

Like I said before, I don't think your assumptions are realistic. I see new Leafs listed at $23k and have seen new i's listed at $16.5k(2014) to $20k(2016), so assuming an EV is $35k w/o incentives is not supported by the facts. I also don't see people junking their EV when they can buy a $5500 battery pack and go another 100k+ miles. Having said that, hybrids also had plenty of incentives, and pretty much everything you're saying about EVs has been said about hybrids.

 

$3500 tops what you could get for most efficient hybrid - Prius. If you think this is comparable to EV incentives, well.. not sure what you are smoking

 

with long winter Canada would not be a good example. BTW is lane splitting (filtering) even legal in Canada? In coastal California bikes are rideable all year around, and filtering can considerably shorten your commute.

With respect to dangers of riding bikes it is all relative; some would consider driving Prius C is way too dangerous.

 

It's a given that each day during the LA area commute times, at least three "motorcyclist down" incidents are reported by traffic updates. From my observations on a 90 mile R/T commute (mostly in HOV lanes), the definition of "splitting" has been warped to motorcyclists exceeding 10mph more than the flow of traffic, motorcyclists driving BETWEEN the double, double yellow lines separating main line from HOV lane, and a lot of other antics that have me worried about one of them plowing into a car or vice versa.

The CHP enforcement of illegal lane splitting is nil. I guess the endpoint is a ride to the hospital or morgue.

 

I hear you. I've gone on the bike through LA and SF, and while overwhelming majority of bie commuters were very reserved, the were a few which treated 60mph cars as slalom obsticals. There is a safe way of splitting and there's unsafe way of doing it; the risks are minimal when traffic stops and you slowly proceed to the front. And you must get back in lane if light goes green or cars ahead start moving. I also a big advocate of headlight modulators and bright single color helmets.
BUT I have to admit CA drivers are much nicer then what we get here, and they are especially nice to bikers. LA drivers got bad wrap, but you'd be surprised how much nicer they are comparing to DC, Atlanta and NYC.

Now back to discussion: there're those who'd feel threatened if they drive anything less then F350 or RAM full size pickup, YMMV

 

baahhhh the crazy bikers here, got nothin' on the Russian psycho's;

some bikers .... kina glad they're not in cars
.

 

That's not really a valid statement. Motorcycles have a mortality rate per vehicle miles driven which is about 35X that of passenger cars. 35X!

As for pickups, they aren't inherently more safe than passenger cars, partially because they often lack the safety features that passenger cars have. There is evidence that the heaviest pickups may be safer, but lighter pickups have had a history of being less safe.

The point is motorcycles ARE inherently unsafe, and the difference is by a huge margin. Basically a motorcycle is a vehicle that would fail every single IIHS test for cars, with each result being the death of the driver.

 

Actually it is x36 as I recall.. Strangely enough the accident rate is lower than of cars, it is just when you get into one you're x36 times more likely to die.

Similarly the mortality rate in smaller car is higher, but the difference is only 1.7-1.8 times.

This is not really the point of discussion here; EV proponents are saying: "we should switch to EV because this is better for environment.. and I love HOV stickers which save me time at everyone else expense".

And when confronted with example of transportation which is considerably cheaper, faster and with lower CO2 footprint there's suddenly an excuse. So why would you get upset with Hammer driver who thinks your iMiEV is a joke, b/c when it collides with his/her HMV monstrosity, he/she has x3 times higher chance to survive? If this is not definition of hypocrisy, what is it then?

 

It's common sense.

One reason people don't ride motorcycles is because they are extremely dangerous.

And most people don't drive Hummers because they're extremely expensive to run and in many ways impractical.

 

fixed it for you:

It's common sense.

One reason people don't buy EV is because they are extremely dangerous and extremely expensive to run and in many ways impractical.

Batteries can catch on fire and you can get electrocuted in case of accident.

And it costs more to charge than to fill it up.

 

You're reaching. EVs aren't known for being dangerous like motorcycles, for obvious reasons.

And if it's too expensive or is impractical to run in your area or for your needs, then yes, it makes sense not to get an EV.

Indeed, I find pure EVs impractical for my needs, which is why I don't own one.