Featured The ‘greenest’ car in America might surprise you

it is well matched to much of the commuting work force. But let's not discount those 10% that drive much further. The majority of drivers are in California. Many workers there have to travel 50-60 or more miles commute, because they can't afford living costs in Orange County, bay area & the like. They often drive in gridlock both ways, & that can add another ½ hour on to their commutes both ways. This so called 'average' commute may consist of many 5-8 minute commutes. That's when a vehicle gets its worse mileage and is often polluting the most.

A huge amount of EV drivers have solar (we got ours years prior to any electric propulsion) & many more are planning to. That can mean a zero sum. How can Oil changes & gasoline be dismissed as a red herring in light of those dynamics?

...... just as the energy used by many sub zero commuters warming up their gas burners for 10 minutes or more before commuting? yes both are unknowns.

True. does upstream pollution count the higher cost for medical care in congested areas where cars cause the majority of pollution? Does it count the cost of oil/military protecting interests in the dangerous areas of the world for example?
.

 

Why Has the EV Market Stalled? (hbr.org)
"But now, as we move into 2024, something is amiss. Last year, Tesla discounted its cars several times, eventually slashing prices on its volume-driving Model S by nearly 25%, and Hertz announced plans to offload its Teslas. GM, for its part, announced that it would be abandoning its near-term EV goals, delaying the production of its EV pickup, and unwinding a joint EV venture with Honda. News stories ran regularly during the year telling of EVs sitting unsold on dealers’ lots. Taking stock of the situation, Toyota’s chairman, Akio Toyoda, predicted that the vast majority of vehicles sold in coming decades would not be fully electric. Confirming that outlook, the Pew Research Center recently reported that half of American adults say their next car probably won’t be an EV.

So what’s going on?

The answer, I believe, is that in the world of greener vehicles, we have reached a classically difficult point in what’s known as the “technology-adoption life cycle” — specifically, the point where the challenge becomes figuring out how to move from what early adopters want to what a broader segment of the market wants.

And what is that? According to research that my colleagues and I have conducted at GBK Collective, what many potential buyers want — and are willing to pay a premium for — are not fully electric vehicles but hybrids and plug-in hybrids that can serve as a bridge between today and our electric future."

 

It isn't a major source of pollution. It does mean more emissions for making the car, but the cleaner operation soon counters that. The emissions of a BEV will equal an ICE in 2 to 3 years, and then it will just get cleaner.

The eGRid data used in GREET is two years out of date; the electric grid is actually cleaner.

The test takes into account where EV sales are occurring. As that market grows, the ratios are shifting away from states with clean grids to ones with dirtier. This combined with new data collection for gas and diesel upstream emissions giving lower results, is a factor in the test scoring.

The ACEEE wants your info to get a copy of the test methodology. The description they post isn't too clear in spots.

They use weight for lifecycle figures, with batteries being treated separate. Is that battery weight subtracted from the car's? The GREET model accounted for replacement batteries over the lifetime, but does it include tires, fluids, starter batteries, etc.? Is how often GREET replaces batteries realistic, or the estimates too high or low?

I'm not saying PHEVs can't be clean cars, just that the transparency of their methodology leaves much to be desired.

 

I think a large part of the initial rush to adopt PHEVs and BEVs was because electricity was significantly less expensive than gasoline. When I bought my Prius Plugin the fuel savings alone paid for the car outright, and not by prorating over the life of the car. I mean each and every single month I owned it I saved more in gas than the payments on the car cost. I dreamed of getting a BEV to make my entire 80-mile commute on all electricity. Fast forward to today when my electricity is now so expensive that it costs more to charge the Prius Prime and drive on battery power than it costs to use gasoline. I now have little interest in a BEV. I have repeatedly looked into solar, but that is a very risky proposition in California where regulators have recently shown their willingness to impose new taxes and fees on solar to bring the costs in line with utility power. My next car may not even be a PHEV purely because of electricity prices.

If the true and honest aim of society is to encourage BEV adoption, all you have to do is make electricity cheap and plentiful (both utility and solar). The economics will drive adoption. Since nobody is doing that, I think it's fair to conclude that they have no real interest in encouraging BEV adoption beyond scoring political points. Mandating people spend twice as much on a car that uses a fuel more expensive than already expensive gasoline isn't going to accomplish what they think it's going to accomplish.

 

Suspect methodology is not necessarily equivalent to faulty methodology. It just means that we don't have the information necessary to validate it. From what I've read, the Model Y is not necessarily using the same battery sizes, chemistries, controls or programming as the Model 3. Which one eats up energy to pre-heat the battery pack prior to charging? Which one has a 24x7x365 climate control to ensure that the kids, animal and electronics don't overheat on a hot day?

I think that the success in obtaining a "green" rating may be related to whether it was designed from the ground up to be low pollution during construction as well as during everyday use. When last I looked at the "Mega press" at the Fremont plant I saw a big, hot machine (a hydraulic press for molten aluminum) that was installed in an open air building outside the main plant. There was no temperature control and it caught fire at least once in my recollection. There was a note on the web site that it was running all day and night so that they did not have to bring it up to the proper heat before trying to use it. It also comes to mind that the batteries are not designed to be easily disassembled and rebuilt / recycled. There are some neat YouTube videos that show the process of dismantling them and it's not pretty.

I have to agree... The Prime at number 1 isn’t a surprise.

 

I found this claim:

Why are electric bills so high in California?

There are many reasons for these high rate increases – two major ones are the increased cost of natural gas used by power plants and the rising costs to maintain our electric grid. As our grid continues to age, significant investments are required to modernize it and ensure reliable power delivery.​

Some sources report a doubling of California electricity rate since 2021. But I also remember the high wind induced fires that wiped out many rural homes and towns.

My current rate in Huntsville AL:

• 1,882 kWh - $216.86 ($0.115228/kWh)
  • 1,400 kWh @$0.105530 - $147.74
  • 482 kWh @$0.113890 - $54.89
• $0.12 / kWh is what I typically use to calculate cost per mile.

Bob Wilson

 

But the rankings don't really make much sense, and without methodology you can't replicate or even analyze the results. At least in the bad hummer is greener than a prius, they showed their work and you could tell how bad the assumptions were. This organization doesn't even do that.

Long range uses the same battery size, chemistry, etc. Model 3 standard range rwd uses LFP chemistry but those are imported and so don't qualify for the tax credit. Their supplier is trying to get North American production fast as this is a lower cost battery and makes sense. Some model Ys had 4680 batteries but tesla is still trying to make them in high volume, so they are in the lower volume cyber truck. Programming gets updated and model 3 and Y get the same updates. Both models allow you to set overheat protection and dog mode. Dog mode is what would keep your pets and kids at the temperature you want while out of the car. Never leave a baby ;-) Both can pre condition batteries to take max charge when arriving at a supercharger. Sentry mode now uses less power.

Fremont's temperature range was fine for testing out the gigapress. Like most industrial innovations sometimes things need to get redesigned. In the case of the giga press (really just a bigger and higher pressure machine) molten aluminum alloy hit hydraulic fluid and caused a quickly contained fire. There were no injuries. Now I believe they have it dialed in, and there are 2 each in Fremont, berlin, and Austin, and 5 in the shanghai plant. I am sure there was stringent temperature control but 850 degrees Celsius is quite high compared to air temperatures in California.

I have no idea about notes on the web. Running 24/7 means that less heat is wasted heating up metal that does not get used. That should have nothing to do with not heating it sufficiently high, but lots of things can go wrong on the first machine.

Yes like your iphone battery it is not meant for a user to disasseble it. This should not hurt recycling. One of the main things that these things get wrong is energy to build the battery.

 

It is truly puzzling how the Model Y gets a better score than the Model 3. It is just a hatchback version of the sedan, that is heavier and less aerodynamic.

Noticed in the ratings that weight, which seems to be an important metric for calculations, is in increments of 500 pounds.

 

That makes no sense, and its even more confusing is the bz4x got a much better score than model Y despite it being less efficient and heavier. much more energy to manufacture (the model Y batteries and vehicle are made very efficiently in the US while the low volume bz4x is made in japan with I believe batteries made in china, then shipped here). The rwd model Y weighs about the same as the bz4x, the awd weighs less than the awd bz4x. The Y has more cargo room and longer range. Hard to think of why the bz4x could possibly beat it in green. I can see some fudge factors giving the prius prime a slight edge to the model 3, but most positions make little sense.

Compare Side-by-Side

 

Deleted message by dbstoo

 

Yes, those are the possible reason a PHEV wins. But the real question is how do people who own PHEV ACTUALLY use them? Do they always remember to plug them in? Not from all the reports we seem to read.

(When I has my PIP, even with only a 14 mile EV range I got about 65% of my miles in EV)

Mike

 

I think that the question "Do they always remember to plug them in?" is not the most accurate measure of using a PHEV in it's most effective mode. In my instance, for example, I know that I often drive less than 5 miles a day. This means that I can limp along on a single charge for 8 days and still not use a drop of gas. But I tend to charge any time the "miles available on battery" falls below 35 so that I will virtually always have enough charge to reach anywhere in my normal driving area.

Keep in mind also that electric companies like PG&E actively discourage people (through TOU pricing plans) from plugging their PHEV in as soon as they have returned from a trip. That discourages building up the habit of charging frequently. It also maximizes PG&E's profits, but that's another story.

 

As a PHEV owner for 5 years now - yes we always plug it in when not in use- that is why we bought it!

We also installed an L2 charger in the garage. Back when the kids had to be driven to and from school there where days we would approach 90 miles on all electric with all the trips. The car gets over 30 miles on a full electric charge and if you plug it in after each use you have unlimited electric range for the day - its range is renewed after each trip.

That would be why many don't understand criticism for the PHEV - it is the perfect vehicle for them.

It fits their lifestyle.

For others an EV may be perfect.
For others an ICE is perfect.
For others a bicycle would be ideal.
There isn't a perfect vehicle for everyone.

In our area electricity is cheap and there is a strong economic motivator to plug in.
In many other areas of our country, you are only costing yourself more money to use electric power rather than gas power - a strong disincentive to plug in.

Another incentive with a PHEV and one that drives purist nuts - you have a choice to run on gas or electric- you get to choose.

 

Went and downloaded GREET. I suspect they aren't directly inputting the data for individual car models into it.

Supply your email, and you can get a copy of ACEEE's method here: ACEEE

Studies are showing that the TOU and EV plans there are getting people to shift EV charging to overnight when the grid is under utilized.

There have been more than one post here where people stated they bought a PHEV for the incentives, and had no plans to plug in. The old incentives in Europe lead to businesses buying PHEVs, and giving them to employees who couldn't charge at home. On top of that, businesses didn't have procedures in place to reimburse employees for charging fees, but did cover petrol and diesel. The popular PHEVs there weren't much better than ICE models in hybrid mode, so carbon emissions actually increased.

PHEVs can be a good solution for many people. They cost more than a hybrid or ICE car though, which is a hurdle to getting people to try them. The avoid the above issues, and ones with flexfuel, more care is needed in crafting incentives. That can also go the other way like with the i3 REx. CARB was too concerned about people not plugging in , so required its hybrid operation to be hobbled to discourage its use.

I'd be concerned with the number of cycles for charging up multiple times a day affecting battery life. Could be a non-problem, but it would occupy my mind more than the thought of stale gas.

 

I'm not allowed to post links, so I can't link to my utility's rate page, but we pay $0.33/kWh for baseline and $0.43/kWh thereafter, and they're about to raise rates by another 10 - 20 %.

It averages out to $0.38/kWh, or $2.47 per charge. At 25 miles per charge and 55 mpg, that electricity rate is the equivalent of $5.43/gallon for gas. Since gas is currently $4.30/gallon it makes zero sense to use electricity. At current gas prices the break even point is $0.30/kWh.

My insurance company just yesterday jacked the price on my insurance on the Prime by 30% with no changes to driving record and no claims, but did not change the price on our gas-powered SUV. It seems like there's a storm of costs being added to PHEVs and maybe BEVs that are completely eliminating the cost advantage that used to justify the large up-front investment. The fact that the same precise thing is happening to solar power in this state at the same time makes it difficult for me to believe it's not intentional somehow.

 

California's grid is pretty steady compared to a lot of states. I'm not allowed to post links, but take a look at the California Independent System Operator's net demand graphs. The demand peaks twice a day. Once around 08:00 and again around 20:00, but the amplitude isn't very large, relatively. The overnight demand is higher than the mid-day demand because of all the solar.

 

Don't many chargers have a charge when electricity is low feature? Or at least start at a time the user sets as a default? Heck my 20 year old house thermostats have that with weekend and vacation settings. I can override at any time.

I have, on weekdays, three billing zones.1 to 3 AM is the cheapest. But even then the peak use is measured as well as the total consumption for that period. 7 to 11 AM is the most expensive as everyone starts us, showers, runs the appliances and workplaces start up. So I get 6 factors that result in an astronomical bill for a big house.

My kids have solar and a PHEV and an EV. They are plugged in whenever they are home.

Happened by my local Tesla 12 station charging lot today. Just off the major highway halfway between Raleigh and Pinehurst, Starbucks and shopping center quite close. 1 vehicle, non-Tesla charging there ar 10 AM>

 

Just came across this: Yet another study shows plug-in hybrids aren't as clean as we thought

The short of it. Turns out the assumption on the amount of EV use by a PHEV for official testing is on the high side. This leads to a gap between test and real world emissions. One that is larger that between non plug ins.

Now, this is for Europe. The EPA rating is closer to real world, thus any gap is smaller from that. More importantly, it doesn't have a combined EV and ICE use figure. Questions about assumed utility factor for things like GREET and things like this test still remain.

 

If you are in a good position to get solar in socal, by all means. Decades ago we were able to zero out our bill & we were averaging over $225 a month way back then - & that included recharging 2 plugins.
.

 

Like John321, I've had a Toyota PHEV since 2019 and like him, I have a level 2 charger for it. Unlike John321, the level 2 charger that I bought is not "installed" as much as it's just plugged in. Yep. Just plugged into the same 220V socket that the clothes dryer would use if it was not using natural gas. The L2 charger looks much like the one that came with the Prius. I purchased it from Amazon for less than $175 back in 2020. It will work on 110V or 220V simply by changing the adapter on the end of the cord.

Part of life with a PHEV is discovering that the government studies were right. Most people do all of their daily chores and errands driving significantly less than 40 miles.

PG&E is not reasonable about mid day rates. They are currently around $0.55 per KWH after 3 pm and stay that way till midnight. If the prices were standardized all day long it would help people to form the habit of charging whenever it's parked. That habit, in turn, would diminish the demand on the grid right at midnight and near 3 PM.