Electric vehicles (EVs), their emissions, and future viability

nwdiver said:

Hmmm... let's see... virtually zero maintenance for ~500k miles; 150 miles(50kWh) of energy delivered on average everyday; 90 miles on the energy in a gallon of gas... AND... for those that accept reality and care about its implications... ~90% less CO2 per mile from a PV powered EV than a petrol powered ICE.
we're the 'crazy' ones? LOL...
~5 more years and all this will be cheaper than a new TDI... if they still sell 'em.

Click to expand...

Would you please just go find some website where folks agree with all of your EV spouting and leave us alone.

1854sailor said:

Would you please just go find some website where folks agree with all of your EV spouting and leave us alone.

Click to expand...

Would you please accept reality... this ICE age is rapidly ending

Nothing I've stated is wrong or even exaggerated. If I'm mistaken please point out.

FYI... this is the EV thread for TDI owners interested in learning from former TDI owners how convenient an upgrade is.

tadawson said:

The envirotards can very rarely see the reality of any situation through the green cloud of thier own bs and spew. The idea that modest regulation works well, so let's push to an extreme and destroy everything is just incomprehensible to their one sided viewpoints.

Good things can cease to be good when overdone, plain and simple!

And I am certain that all 11 bikers using that lane are thrilled . . . the tens of thousand others are just screwed . . .

- Tim

Click to expand...

Yep, you nailed it.

nwdiver said:

Hmmm... let's see... virtually zero maintenance for ~500k miles; 150 miles(50kWh) of energy delivered on average everyday; 90 miles on the energy in a gallon of gas... AND... for those that accept reality and care about its implications... ~90% less CO2 per mile from a PV powered EV than a petrol powered ICE.
we're the 'crazy' ones? LOL...
~5 more years and all this will be cheaper than a new TDI... if they still sell 'em.

Click to expand...

Except trading one pollution for another, yep, your a hero.

5 years, your on, won't happen, and for starters, the infrastructure couldn't handle it. CA is already having brownouts so what makes you think they can handle the entire population plugging in?

turbovan+tdi said:

5 years, your on, won't happen, and for starters, the infrastructure couldn't handle it. CA is already having brownouts so what makes you think they can handle the entire population plugging in?

Click to expand...

Awesome... glad you brought that myth up... that's like myth #.... ok, I've lost count... anyway...

There is typically >300GWh of additional capacity available everyday in California alone. That's 900M miles of driving or 22.5M EVs driving 40 miles/day vs 13M cars in Ca. Yeah... the grid ain't a problem... plenty of power for everyone. On top of that... EVs are variable demand... if additional power is required most EV charging can be curtailed for a few hours without the owners ever noticing. AND... solar PV is expanding ~10x faster than we're putting EVs on the road to consume electricity... so...... yeah....

Batteries will likely be <$100/kWh by 2020. Which means a 200 mile EV drive train that requires no maintenance for ~500k miles will cost ~$10k.

turbovan+tdi said:

Except trading one pollution for another, yep, your a hero.

Click to expand...

What pollution is that exactly?

nwdiver said:

Awesome... glad you brought up that myth up... that's like myth #.... ok, I've lost count... anyway...

There is typically >300GWh of additional capacity available everyday in California alone. That's 900M miles of driving or 22.5M EVs driving 40 miles/day vs 13M cars in Ca. Yeah... the grid ain't a problem... plenty of power for everyone. On top of that... EVs are variable demand... if additional power is required most EV charging can be curtailed for a few hours without the owners ever noticing. AND... solar PV is expanding ~10x faster than we're putting EVs on the road to consume electricity... so...... yeah....

Batteries will likely be <$100/kWh by 2020. Which means a 200 mile EV drive train that requires no maintenance for ~500k miles will cost ~$10k.



What pollution is that exactly?

Click to expand...

So if they have a reserve, why are there blackouts? Faking it? Oh wait, maybe because they haven't paid Canada/BC for the power we sell them,

http://www.rense.com/general10/hy.htm

Pollution, oh yeah, battery's don't kill anyone or anything when made, gotcha. Someone already brought up the nasty mess making solar panels which you always seem to forget.

Still won't see it by 2020. I am all for alternate fuels but we are at least 50 years away from EV cars making any sense. That's my prediction,

Had to chuckle at this-

For $15.99, a pack includes hang tags for vehicles that urge fellow drivers not to unplug others’ cars while charging.

Click to expand...

Great article on people getting aggressive on charging stations.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/11/s...c-cars-outpace-plugs-and-sparks-fly.html?_r=0

A great article on true costs.

http://www.edmunds.com/fuel-economy/the-true-cost-of-powering-an-electric-car.html

Here's an article that says it can tax the grid and all upgrades to the grid are paid for by every tax payer. Hmmm, taxpayer double dipping.

http://www.technologyreview.com/news/518066/could-electric-cars-threaten-the-grid/

A house only drawing 2 kW at peak load? Maybe with everything being gas, but if there's an electric dryer or oven, that's quite a lot more than 2 kW easily.

nwdiver said:

Awesome... glad you brought up that myth up... that's like myth #.... ok, I've lost count... anyway...

There is typically >300GWh of additional capacity available everyday in California alone. That's 900M miles of driving or 22.5M EVs driving 40 miles/day vs 13M cars in Ca. Yeah... the grid ain't a problem... plenty of power for everyone.

Click to expand...

Better look at that power chart again. It tops out at 40,000 MW (40 GW). That is not 300GW, much less 300GWh. Additionally, 37 GW represented the available resources, while the minimum demand for the day was 22 GW. The actual reserve available was 15 GW. I believe that is nowhere near 300 GW.

Your little utopia may exist someday. Today is not that day.

Riflesmith said:

Better look at that power chart again. It tops out at 40,000 MW (40 GW). That is not 300GW, much less 300GWh. Additionally, 37 GW represented the available resources, while the minimum demand for the day was 22 GW. The actual reserve available was 15 GW. I believe that is nowhere near 300 GW.
Your little utopia may exist someday. Today is not that day.

Click to expand...

Another reason people have such a hard time understanding this... you're confusing power and energy. A continuous 15GW (POWER) reserve = 360GWh/day (ENERGY).

15GW x 24hrs = 360GWh

turbovan+tdi said:

So if they have a reserve, why are there blackouts? Faking it? Oh wait, maybe because they haven't paid Canada/BC for the power we sell them,

Click to expand...

Yes... there will be short periods that demand may exceed supply... this is why demand response is important. Electric vehicles have the potential to help grid stability tremendously since they can serve as variable demand.

I did do some more reading last night and it seems they are on the fence regarding the grid, so I'll guess we'll see what happens.

$25,000 rebate? Is this starting to sound like preferential treatment for the rich? For example, there are very few initiatives in Ca. anymore for HOV lane access. EV only, no more Prius/hybrids that aren't plug-ins.
But if you have $125k to spend, then have we got a deal for you!
Seems a little "rich" for my liking:

http://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-hy-tesla-model-x-tax-break-20151012-story.html

turbovan+tdi said:

I did do some more reading last night and it seems they are on the fence regarding the grid, so I'll guess we'll see what happens.

Click to expand...

I'd be interested so read your opposition piece can you please provide a link.

Obviously if everyone drove an EV and everyone plugged in when they got home simultaneously to charge at 20kW the grid would collapse... there's a lot of things we could all do at once to take down the grid. That problem is easily avoided with demand charges or even better demand response. Every EV sold today can be programed to charge at a certain time to take advantage of off-peak pricing.

One item that simply cannot be disputed is that there is currently more than enough surplus capacity available on a daily basis on the US grid to power >150M EVs.

Also consider that having that buffer isn't free or desirable but is a natural outcome of the fact that our society doesn't consume the same amount of energy at all hours of the day. Taking advantage of that nighttime surplus to charge our vehicles will increase the Capacity Factor of our infrastructure and lower the overall cost of electricity.

turbovan+tdi said:

A great article on true costs.

http://www.edmunds.com/fuel-economy/the-true-cost-of-powering-an-electric-car.html

Click to expand...

Yes, the cost of charging varies wildly; At home I pay $0.03/kWh (~$0.01/mi) then at work and on the road it's free. Solar is now incredibly cheap and getting cheaper. If you shop around you can get everything you need for ~$1/w before any government incentives. That comes out to <$0.04/kWh for most of the US. ~$0.06/kWh for Canada due to less sunlight.

tvmaster said:

$25,000 rebate? Is this starting to sound like preferential treatment for the rich? For example, there are very few initiatives in Ca. anymore for HOV lane access. EV only, no more Prius/hybrids that aren't plug-ins.
But if you have $125k to spend, then have we got a deal for you!
Seems a little "rich" for my liking:

http://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-hy-tesla-model-x-tax-break-20151012-story.html

Click to expand...

So you understand this properly as it is complicated and few people who are not business owners are familiar with it. It is accelerated 1st year depreciation for any vehicle with a greater than 6,000 pound GVWR. There is a lot wrong with this law, mostly that it encouraged gas guzzlers. This $25,000 allowance was instituted by George Bush around 2004 as a means to encourage sales of USA full size trucks over Japanese trucks. Included is pretty much every 3/4 ton truck, van, and largest of the SUV's. To depreciate the full $25,000 you must be using the vehicle 100% for business and be prepared to prove it or pay heavy fines. Any business vehicle gets depreciated down to zero as the years go by. The only advantage here is that you can depreciate $25,000 of that right away, but then you get less allowance in the following years. In addition, if your business sells the vehicle for any amount over the depreciation, it must be paid back. For example; I buy a Ford F250 for $45,000. I take the first year depreciation of $25,000. Now that trucks value on my books is $20,000. After one year I decide to sell it and it goes for $30,000. Well then I just showed a profit of $10,000 and I must pay taxes on that. I bought and sold a Dodge 2500 in exactly this scenario. So, if huge polluting gas guzzlers get this special deal, why would a clean running EV of the same specs not deserve it? Does this help you understand?

On the other hand, VW's cheating emissions garnered a $1,200 tax credit for those purchased in 2009. I was one of those buyers. This resulted in credits of well over $50,000,000 that were illegitimate. And you can say, that $50 million was stolen from our general funds, meaning the tax payer. I don't expect IRS to ask for this back from owners but they do want it back from VW, with the usual heavy fines that any tax evader is hit with. http://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyph...-volkswagen-dealings-with-irs-on-tax-credits/

gene r said:

So you understand this properly as it is complicated and few people who are not business owners are familiar with it. It is accelerated 1st year depreciation for any vehicle with a greater than 6,000 pound GVWR. There is a lot wrong with this law, mostly that it encouraged gas guzzlers. This $25,000 allowance was instituted by George Bush around 2004 as a means to encourage sales of USA full size trucks over Japanese trucks. Included is pretty much every 3/4 ton truck, van, and largest of the SUV's. To depreciate the full $25,000 you must be using the vehicle 100% for business and be prepared to prove it or pay heavy fines. Any business vehicle gets depreciated down to zero as the years go by. The only advantage here is that you can depreciate $25,000 of that right away, but then you get less allowance in the following years. In addition, if your business sells the vehicle for any amount over the depreciation, it must be paid back. For example; I buy a Ford F250 for $45,000. I take the first year depreciation of $25,000. Now that trucks value on my books is $20,000. After one year I decide to sell it and it goes for $30,000. Well then I just showed a profit of $10,000 and I must pay taxes on that. I bought and sold a Dodge 2500 in exactly this scenario. So, if huge polluting gas guzzlers get this special deal, why would a clean running EV of the same specs not deserve it? Does this help you understand?

On the other hand, VW's cheating emissions garnered a $1,200 tax credit for those purchased in 2009. I was one of those buyers. This resulted in credits of well over $50,000,000 that were illegitimate. And you can say, that $50 million was stolen from our general funds, meaning the tax payer. I don't expect IRS to ask for this back from owners but they do want it back from VW, with the usual heavy fines that any tax evader is hit with. http://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyph...-volkswagen-dealings-with-irs-on-tax-credits/

Click to expand...

I think we're on a different wavelength. my concern isn't how one depreciates a 'business' vehicle, as loads of people can claim that concept, rightly or wrongly. half the rich kids/spouses in Orange County probably "work" for dads company. My concern is A: the HOV lanes are made more accessible to the wealthy, and B: the rich get richer. that's all. A $43k car (volt) gets $7500 break, a $110k car, $25000 break. Seems imbalanced. I've never thought tax incentives that truly provide a benefit for the country are 'stealing' from taxpayers. But if they're disproportionate in favour of a certain company or individual, them my eyebrows raise. Tesla's stock is getting hammered, they can't produce that affordable car, SpaceX is on shaky boosters, and I wonder if Elon's being cut a break by the Feds in hopes he produces that 'affordable' car.

nwdiver said:

I'd be interested so read your opposition piece can you please provide a link.

.

Click to expand...

I just hit google, searched california, ev, grids etc, dozens of articles came up.

turbovan+tdi said:

I just hit google, searched california, ev, grids etc, dozens of articles came up.

Click to expand...

Yes... they run the gambit from insane to wrong... I'm curious as to which one you thought provided a realistic appraisal.

I consider the DOE a fairly reliable source where energy is concerned.

nwdiver said:

Yes... they run the gambit from insane to wrong... I'm curious as to which one you thought provided a realistic appraisal.
I consider the DOE a fairly reliable source where energy is concerned.

Click to expand...

That was one of them.

nwdiver said:

Another reason people have such a hard time understanding this... you're confusing power and energy. A continuous 15GW (POWER) reserve = 360GWh/day (ENERGY).

15GW x 24hrs = 360GWh



Yes... there will be short periods that demand may exceed supply... this is why demand response is important. Electric vehicles have the potential to help grid stability tremendously since they can serve as variable demand.

Click to expand...

I worked around & in the power industry for years so there are some real flow to some of your thinking...

Rated Peak load is almost never actual peak load available.....Power plants require a lot of maintenance to keep running at anything close to peak power ...And a lot of the so called and assumed to be available load for off time use to charge these fantasies from the future is not really there much of the time...

Off peak hours is when almost all of the REQUIRED for normal opertation maintenance which is needed to keep these things producing power is done. Then there are unexpected outages which cut available power output perisly close grid overload...

Then throw in the push to replace a lot if not all of the used today power our grid coal fired power plants. Removing this avalable load with other, so called renewables we are loosing a large part of this assumed off time power for charging to use for charging these things...

And enough with you claiming load related power outages & brownouts do not orrur! They do still happen when weather extremes like heat waves and extreme cold snaps happen....

Then consider the extreme pollution produced today from solar cell production and batteries production is one of dirtiest things we still carry out........

Then throw in the fact that windmills have costs and a price to pay to enviroment themselves which is ignored by many fanatics like you who worship at the alter of the future.....

These things requre a lot of very expensive maintenance and kill many creatures who are unlucky enough to be going along minding their business when they get chopped to bits by one of these windmils...

Electric vehciles have a place, in the hands those zealots like you who knows who I speaking of living in a fantasy world they have created where no reality is ever allowed in......

And in the hands of those who have so much money they don't care what their next new tow costs them or us....

And then you throw in the real tax cheats, those who think they have no financial responsibility like to pay taxes in any form...

Then the people who may get benefits paid for by the rest of us from the government they hate so have figured out how to use these pie in the sky toys today to get out of paying road & income taxes....

But for the rest of us they are a technoligy which is still decades away from being something usefull and available at a price the average driver can afford without a government handout...that is without the tax cheating they are based on today.....

Keep down on your knees worshipping at your all electric god's alter....

But please shut up about how the rest of us being so wrong on this, how our world is so wrong, how "how could the rest of us not see it" and why don't you just enjoy what to you makes so much sense in your way of thinking....

I am tired of watching you attack without a real response anything brought up which does not tightly fit into your currrently constructed fantasy land..........

This technoligy is decades from being practicle to rest of us who don't have any wish to live with the inconvienences and hardships which come with EVs today....

I could care less if you agree, frankly I never expect you to agree with anything that is not part of your current version of your constructed world....And you know what,,,,,,,,that is just fine with me and a lot of other people here.......

But what is not ok is your free ride road tax & tax credit wise.....This free ride bought at the cost of money's given to you taken from someone who really needs the help to get food or to keep their heat on in winter!

I have paid for your fanastsy with my taxes long enough....EV technoligy needs to stand on it's own or go away until it has matured enough not to continue to need it's current gotten billions in hand outs to exist............

Then ICE technology needs to stand on its own, too.

I would be far from surprised if the oil supply for ICE alone is subsidized more than the subsidies that EVs are getting, and the negative externalities from ICE pollution are currently not being internalized.

I am all for the real cost of getting energy to the pump being added, $9-10 a gal for gas & D2 would about make the ground even on that part.......

But to my point as I have been preaching for years..... current on shelf today diesel power drivetrains is the only viable replacement today to get us in a fuel sipping fleet at a reasonable cost....Just as it has always been, you want to give tax credits to a useful today tech which will really reduce oil use, give those tax credits to 60-70 mpgUS diesel autos....


.Stop waisting tax money's on the current less than useless to most EV tech of today....


Give those tax credits to all Off the shelf today light duty diesel auto tech.......Long range of driving, ease of quick fillups, could cut energy consumption by more than half overnight if push into the fleet like they are trying to push the current EV extremely expensive gargage with little to any benefit for the breaks they are given!

Except EVs aren't "less than useless" to most, especially EREVs, especially long-range ones like the Volt.

If I had a Volt, I'd be able to do exactly the same long distance drives I can in my TDI, while (on a 2016, per a combination of estimates and magazine tests) getting close to the same mileage on the highway, and far better mileage in stop and go traffic, which means lower carbon footprint because gasoline has less CO2 emissions per gallon. Oh, and I would have to stop every ~370-400 mi (after the initial ~420-450 mi tank that included battery charge) instead of every ~700 mi... But I stop more often than that for restroom breaks anyway.

And, one huge problem with diesels is the extreme cost required to get them to actually meet emissions... and they're still emitting what they are within a city center if they're driving within one (the worst possible place to do so), while even a 100% coal-powered EV is emitting outside of that city center.

It's also worth noting that 80.7% of the US lives in urban areas.

While I am not a fan of hybrids for what they give compared to their costs, the Volt is not a EV, but is a hybrid.....Pretty much all hybrids today are going to have short electric only, but that does not in any way make them the currently useless to most EV tech being spoke of....

All your point is doing is muddying up water which is already so dark no one can see through it to the truth that lies beneath......Hybrids can be fueled up in the normal manor the same as a current diesel or gasser.....A true EV must waist hours charging to go similar distance to a hybrid, gasser, or diesel......

So as far as I am concerned the Volt, Prius with electric range share next to nothing in terms of benefits or faults of true useless EVs.....So are irrelevant to this discussion....

There's major differences between a PHEV and an EREV in battery usage strategy, though.

PHEVs will regularly start their engine even with sufficient battery charge, as their electric motors are undersized for the propulsion application, and require engine assistance. (In addition, the Prius's transmission design requires that the engine be started any time the vehicle is moving over 43 mph, IIRC, else the electric motors will overspeed. I think the plug-in Prius changed some gear ratios to allow a little more speed before that happens, but it's still not a car that's freeway capable in EV mode.)

The Volt drives like a BEV until the battery runs out, and only then does it start its engine, in typical driving. (You can command an engine start to either maintain battery charge ("Hold" mode, which GM recommends using when on the freeway) or increase battery charge ahead of a high power demand ("Mountain" mode), and sometimes the engine will start to assist with cabin heating or to propel the car if the battery is outside of allowable temperature ranges.) Many people can drive a Volt without ever having the engine start up except to burn off stale fuel. This is why the plug-in tax credits are based on battery size, rather than whether the vehicle's a BEV, EREV, or PHEV - because an EREV often acts as a BEV that has a safety net for many drivers, not as a PHEV.

rotarykid said:

While I am not a fan of hybrids for what they give

Click to expand...

A Prius "gives" about 50 MPG combined MPG for 21 - 25k USD. Compare that to EPA combined MPG for your car, but remember to multiply the figure by 0.87 to account for the extra carbon in diesel fuel. And of course, the Prius is super reliable.

So while you probably do not like the look and miss the torque of your car, the Prius beats your diesel handily.

Second, I think you are right about the internalized cost of petrol or diesel being close to $9 a US gallon, but a little arithmetic should prove to you beyond any doubt that EVs and PHEVs are much cheaper than that over the car's lifetime.

Saying that only a diesel can supply all needs is silly since needs vary by person; and discounting limited range PHEVs is ridiculous. A PHEV used as EV half the time and gasser half the time ends up with twice the nominal MPG rating. That puts even the Volt, with it's fairly crappy engine, at about 90 - 100 MPG for the fleet of cars sold. Show me any diesel that comes close.

For that matter, consider a fleet of US cars that get 55 MPG like the upcoming Prius and have 20 miles of EV range. Over a large group in the US that works out to ~ 50% of miles being EV, and the passenger car fleet then averaging 110 MPG. Diesel ? Not even in the running. How about cost ? Well, 20 miles of EV range takes about 5 kWh of useable capacity, so about a 7 kWh battery. OEMs are now paying about $150 a kWh so the additional marginal cost to the hybrid manufacturer to double the liquid fuel MPG is about $1000. EVs and PHEVs are no brainers in terms of carbon; and properly run on clean energy for their EV portions, are THE solution for tailpipe emissions. There is no argument to be made for anything else that makes a whit of sense.

While you are doing homework, compare the NOx emissions of gas PHEVs with diesel spew. I'll help you with a couple gassers: Nox emissions are 10 mg/mile in the Prius hybrid, and no more than 20 mg/mile in the CARB compliant Volt. Actually, I'll help you with your car, too: it emits ~ 500 mg/mile on-road. No typos -- TEN mg/mile for the Prius, FIVE HUNDRED mg/mile for your diesel.

I would also argue that the Gen 1 Volt's driveline is part of why it's so inefficient - serial hybrids suck, and below 36 mph, the Gen 1 Volt uses its engine in a serial hybrid configuration, and it also becomes serial whenever there's high power demand when the engine is running.

The Gen 2 Volt's engine, however, borrows from the Mazda SkyActiv-G playbook - very high compression (12.5:1 despite running on RUG) and wide-range cam phasers, to use cam timing to throttle the engine rather than a throttle plate (upshot, you get diesel-like low pumping losses at low load, without having to run lean and get high NOx output, by effectively reducing the displacement and compression ratio of the engine on demand... but only for the intake and compression strokes, the power and exhaust strokes run at full displacement and expansion ratio, meaning more energy is extracted than a smaller displacement engine). And, its powertrain is always acting as a parallel hybrid when the engine is running.

tvmaster said:

I think we're on a different wavelength. my concern isn't how one depreciates a 'business' vehicle, as loads of people can claim that concept, rightly or wrongly. half the rich kids/spouses in Orange County probably "work" for dads company. My concern is A: the HOV lanes are made more accessible to the wealthy, and B: the rich get richer. that's all. A $43k car (volt) gets $7500 break, a $110k car, $25000 break. Seems imbalanced. I've never thought tax incentives that truly provide a benefit for the country are 'stealing' from taxpayers. But if they're disproportionate in favour of a certain company or individual, them my eyebrows raise. Tesla's stock is getting hammered, they can't produce that affordable car, SpaceX is on shaky boosters, and I wonder if Elon's being cut a break by the Feds in hopes he produces that 'affordable' car.

Click to expand...

TVMASTER, Your concern "B" stumps me. The $7500 break is an incentive to get a new industry rolling along. This is common practice by governments all over the world in order to kickstart beneficial industry. The ICE industry is still subsidized hugely with tax breaks for exploration, near free lands for drilling, a military to steal oil from foreign lands and medical care for those inflicted by petroleum caused disease. These add up easily to $7500 per car (which runs out soon anyway). The health costs of ICE pollution is devastating (I know, my wife died 4 months ago from leukemia caused by a refinery, she and all her childhood friends have died from the same illness. Ask our two children how much their mother was worth? This is why we drive electric and after I dump the TDI will never buy gas nor diesel again). AGAIN: The $25,000 deduction (not credit) does not favor any one company nor economic class. It favors anyone with a business buy any 3/4 ton pickup or 6,000 GVWR SUV. These are not cars for the rich. A person can buy a stripped F250 for what? $35,000 and still get the $25,000 benefit. Ford sells way more F250 than Tesla will ever sell the Model X, what what's your gripe here? Shouldn't it be with Ford, Chevy and Dodge? The Tesla is the most made in America car you can buy. Ford trucks made in Mexico, Dodge made in Mexico, Chevy made in Mexico. These trucks get the $25,000. Elon Musk getting special treatment for adding 10,000 jobs in California?

Your concern "A"? "HOV lanes are made more accessible to the wealthy"? Are you kidding? Any car with two or more passengers, or any EV. No more hybrids as they no longer need incentive to establish. Full EV's are available from Fiat, Nissan, Chevy, BMW, Ford by lease as low as $140 a month (you save more by not buying gas), as well as many of these at a net purchase price as low as $16,000. About 1/2 the price of a TDI. Right there in Orange County Costa Mesa Nissan has 2015 Leaf's down to about a $15,000 net!

bhtooefr said:

There's major differences between a PHEV and an EREV in battery usage strategy, though.

PHEVs will regularly start their engine even with sufficient battery charge, as their electric motors are undersized for the propulsion application, and require engine assistance. (In addition, the Prius's transmission design requires that the engine be started any time the vehicle is moving over 43 mph, IIRC, else the electric motors will overspeed. I think the plug-in Prius changed some gear ratios to allow a little more speed before that happens, but it's still not a car that's freeway capable in EV mode.)

The Volt drives like a BEV until the battery runs out, and only then does it start its engine, in typical driving. (You can command an engine start to either maintain battery charge ("Hold" mode, which GM recommends using when on the freeway) or increase battery charge ahead of a high power demand ("Mountain" mode), and sometimes the engine will start to assist with cabin heating or to propel the car if the battery is outside of allowable temperature ranges.) Many people can drive a Volt without ever having the engine start up except to burn off stale fuel. This is why the plug-in tax credits are based on battery size, rather than whether the vehicle's a BEV, EREV, or PHEV - because an EREV often acts as a BEV that has a safety net for many drivers, not as a PHEV.

Click to expand...

The 43 MPH limit for EV driving pertains to the Gen2 (2004 - 2009) HV Prius.

The Gen1 Prius plug-in is 62 MPH and 38 kW maximum power draw before the car kicks out of EV mode.

I know GM likes to say that a PHEV will have more cold starts than a Volt but the calculation always ignores the realities that people will choose a car to match their driving patterns; that "highway" driving in urban areas is often below 65 MPH; and the Toyota solution emits ~ 50% the NOx per mile as the Volt when warm. I read one GM presentation that suggested without data that 25% of NOx emissions are from cold start. If true and applied to a Prius plug-in bought to match daily driving with battery size, the driver might average NOx emissions of around 2 mg/mile. At that point the Volt 'advantage' is getting hard to see.

gene r said:

TVMASTER, Your concern "B" stumps me. The $7500 break is an incentive to get a new industry rolling along. This is common practice by governments all over the world in order to kickstart beneficial industry. The ICE industry is still subsidized hugely with tax breaks for exploration, near free lands for drilling, a military to steal oil from foreign lands and medical care for those inflicted by petroleum caused disease. These add up easily to $7500 per car (which runs out soon anyway). The health costs of ICE pollution is devastating (I know, my wife died 4 months ago from leukemia caused by a refinery, she and all her childhood friends have died from the same illness. Ask our two children how much their mother was worth? This is why we drive electric and after I dump the TDI will never buy gas nor diesel again). AGAIN: The $25,000 deduction (not credit) does not favor any one company nor economic class. It favors anyone with a business buy any 3/4 ton pickup or 6,000 GVWR SUV. These are not cars for the rich. A person can buy a stripped F250 for what? $35,000 and still get the $25,000 benefit. Ford sells way more F250 than Tesla will ever sell the Model X, what what's your gripe here? Shouldn't it be with Ford, Chevy and Dodge? The Tesla is the most made in America car you can buy. Ford trucks made in Mexico, Dodge made in Mexico, Chevy made in Mexico. These trucks get the $25,000. Elon Musk getting special treatment for adding 10,000 jobs in California?

Your concern "A"? "HOV lanes are made more accessible to the wealthy"? Are you kidding? Any car with two or more passengers, or any EV. No more hybrids as they no longer need incentive to establish. Full EV's are available from Fiat, Nissan, Chevy, BMW, Ford by lease as low as $140 a month (you save more by not buying gas), as well as many of these at a net purchase price as low as $16,000. About 1/2 the price of a TDI. Right there in Orange County Costa Mesa Nissan has 2015 Leaf's down to about a $15,000 net!

Click to expand...

as I said, we're on a different wavelength, and yours is indeed valid. sorry about your wife

SageBrush said:

The 43 MPH limit for EV driving pertains to the Gen2 (2004 - 2009) HV Prius.

The Gen1 Prius plug-in is 62 MPH and 38 kW maximum power draw before the car kicks out of EV mode.

I know GM likes to say that a PHEV will have more cold starts than a Volt but the calculation always ignores the realities that people will choose a car to match their driving patterns; that "highway" driving in urban areas is often below 65 MPH; and the Toyota solution emits ~ 50% the NOx per mile as the Volt when warm. I read one GM presentation that suggested without data that 25% of NOx emissions are from cold start. If true and applied to a Prius plug-in bought to match daily driving with battery size, the driver might average NOx emissions of around 2 mg/mile. At that point the Volt 'advantage' is getting hard to see.

Click to expand...

My Volt takes me on a 36 mile roundtrip to work every day. 9 1/2 months of the year there's no gasoline involved in that drive (which includes ~10 miles of 70 mph freeway).
I think the cold start issue is very significant. Even if my commute were less than 15 miles and I limited my speed to 62 mph it's possible that I'd end up kicking in the ICE on a Prius plug-in due to acceleration needs. The Volt allows full "throttle" on electric alone.

Article this morning: VW To Focus On Electric, Plug-In Hybrid Tech, Slash Spending Due To Diesel Scandal

"It's a remarkable turnaround for the company more identified with its so-called "clean diesels" both in Europe and North America than for anything with a plug.
And it indicates that despite the company's pledge to sell only the cleanest diesels in those two markets, it sees more promise in vehicles that can run without emitting anything at all for some or all of their miles."


http://www.greencarreports.com/news/...diesel-scandal


I'd say VW is finally seeing the writing on the wall. They recognize to resist change, is to go out of business.
__________________