My year with the Volt. Costs and Comparisons

No you don't. You wrote that it's to maximize efficiency. Go and ask some politicians about their support for plug-ins. Ask them how much efficiency they'd trade to eliminate gasoline imports, which short-range plug-ins like the PiP can't do because they can't substitute enough gasoline. Ask them how much they'd give to remove the stranglehold petroleum has on transportation. Do you really, really understand the crippling effect of dependency on the economy, military budget and foreign policy? Petroleum has a lot of uses but there's only one that can bring the economy to a screeching halt and that's in transportation. Move transportation away from petroleum and you free it. Move it to electricity and you gain fungibility and synergy of use. And you won't even give up a little to gain a lot? Go on, try telling politicians that the PiP's the solution.

 

Not yet.. I'm still working on reverse engineering the PIDs...

I don't think you've consumed less energy.. I used data since mid august in my last post since I though that was when you got your pip.. and it would not be fair for me to use all my summer data where I do even better. Seems you got it in mid october..

Since Oct 12, I've used 427 kwH for 1568 miles of EV and 5.7 gallons for 229ICE miles or the energy equivalent of 18.3 gallons.

This post show you having used 240kWh + charging losses + 29 gallons, the energy equivalent of 26.05 gallons which is a lot more energy than I used.


Interesting that you still cling to WTW, despeite my providing multiple references, in multipel threads, suggesting EROI is the better model.

Why?

There is no "average" percentage for a driver from EPA data. The 61% EV you are using for the volt is based on the average percentage of total miles, not what an average driver does, not an average of EV percentages. That's not what is estimated by e J2841's utility factor. Overall average usage is not the same usage of the average driver. In fact there is often a big difference.

The long tail of miles where a few people do a while lot of driving skew the average percentage of miles, which is why it is better to consider the median. There are volt drivers, just as there are PiP drivers, that never plug their car in -- but bought it for HOV access. They really mess with the overall EV/HV ratio as their cars are not being used as the model suggests. The closest we can get to real-world "average" percentage is to use voltstats data and fuelly (and the self-reported data on the EPA site).

 

Despite all of that, put a good hypermiler in a Gen 2 and they can still do better than in a Gen 3. Of course, how can I know for sure when Toyota never made a Gen 3 1.5L?

What about the Prius C?

DBCassidy



Read more: http://priuschat.com/threads/my-year-with-the-volt-costs-and-comparisons.120476/page-5#ixzz2Iee3RITm

DrI pays for wind power. I think his well to wheel is pretty good
Does he use a dedicated wind power grid? If not, why not?

DBCassidy


Read more: http://priuschat.com/threads/my-year-with-the-volt-costs-and-comparisons.120476/page-6#ixzz2IefEnyH7

Yet, the Prius has the majority of the hybrid market.

DBCassidy

 

The specs for the ELR seem to imply blending for more power. I don't think there is any way blending makes a volt more efficient. The fisker karma and porsche 918 offer blended mode for power. There is no patent protection that toyota has.

I fully expect a more powerful battery with a larger AER in the next generation prius phv, so that it can get closer to american driving habits. It is not doing well in Japan.

 

WOW, I until I reviewed the report, I thought Colorado would have a low % of coal burning. Unless he gets his green power on a dedicated power line (highly unlikely), Yes, he is consuming coal generated electricity. Theres' no way around it.

DBCassidy

The Volt, no matter how you look at it, one thing that can not be disputed: the dead weight issues of the batteries and the ICE in the Volt. When in Battery mode, the ICE is dead weight, when in ICE mode, the batteries are dead weight. Either way, it is not an efficient way to manage power.

Blending, would indeed make the Volt more efficient than the current setup.

DBCassidy

 

Prius supporters continuously heard "dead weight" arguments. It went on for years and years, despite the fact that there wasn't actually any long duration when either the battery or engine remained unused.

Now when that is actually true for Volt, nada, zip, nothing. It's wrong on so many levels, how can we expect to get constructive feedback? The next step is going to be a challenge. What will the current owners think of a scaled back design, one that uses a blend of battery & engine? Approach will have to change to draw in mainstream sales. There is the possibility of GM choosing to support both a "dead weight" approach and one that strives for a balance. But without a non-plug model to supplement production volume, it's an expensive business risk.

Maybe their reports will help with that transistion. After all, details of the past are often forgotten or not even known anyway. Even though it takes much longer, the halo delay really could be the key. Arguing design shortcomings doesn't accomplish anything and they know quite well that cost-reduction won't be solved by technology breakthrus alone.

 

Ironic. you first state the Prius heard the lame dead weight arguments. then make it yourself. Here on PCchat and in the news there are plenty of uninformed complaints about the volt's dead weight.. by people that don't understand what EREVs are really all about. 'll consider your argument about what is dead weight when your lifetime MPG is over 200.. till then you are just a confused EREV hater just like those tossing around dead weights against the prius.

A CT200h has the same blended design, but closer in power/accel to a volt.. and similar highwayMPG, and overall uses much much more gas for most drivers.

A scaled back design is unlikely, but a user-controlled blended mode for heat or a slightly increased overall power would be welcomed by many/most. Some owners are economy oriented, some care about the environment, some about power other styles. Only costs (economy) oriented folks would favor scaled back to reduce battery size.. and if they own one already they would simply not get a new one so scaling back would not help.
A scaled back design would be hated by the rest of those groups.. who are likely the much larger fraction of EREV buyers and definately of the ELR market.

 

That's called pointing out a double-standard.

The design is intended to deliver EV by avoiding use of the engine, only starting combustion when absolutely necessary, even if efficiency opportunities are lost. But since that wasn't even the point of the post, why bother?

GM needs to produce a high-efficiency vehicles that is purchase in high-volume. No argument about semantics will change that. They must deliver something for mainstream buyers. Period.

Volt itself can continue being appreciated by owners. That's great! There's nothing wrong with enthusiasts. They provide ambition & excitement. But enthusiasts are not middle-market, who don't share the same passion. They couldn't care less about whether a vehicle is called an EREV or a PHEV. In fact, most won't have any clue how the system actually works. They just need a practical & reliable vehicle that's affordable.

 

Glad to see you admit you are applying a double standard.

Without knowledge of the "future", running only in EV IS the most efficient thing the car can do. No car currently uses an algorithm that is based on the expected trip, which is the only way to make it more efficient.
Let us know when you get any where near the efficient of the OP.

Oh, and main stream buyers generally don't care about efficiency as the number one feature, so providing a powerful quiet smooth EV ride has other benefits.

Your arguments about the need for market share are exactly the same type of arguments used against the Prius when it launched, and about which you complained bitterly then. You really do like to apply double standards don't you.

 

We agree on the need for energy independence. I think we disagree on the perspective on the big picture. What does it mean "a little" or "a lot" to you is different than my perspective.

Oil import from hostile regions, is less than you think. I think it is "a little". Saving a few hundred more gallon of gas from having an over-sized PHEV is "a little". I think the $7,500 tax credit to support (despite increase in emission) is a lot. I think a regular hybrid (practical and affordable) selling massively saves a lot of gas. A plugin that covers many short trips in EV and still operate like a regular hybrid after, will be the next step.

Domestic oil production is projected to go up. Domestic natural gas production is going up as well. That's why the support for fuel cell using NG is on the raise. The price of natural gas is going down and the price of hydrogen is projected to go down as well.

We need multiple routes to achieve it. Funneling everything through a slow refueling network (electricity) is going to create bottleneck. We need the plugins because the cost of electricity is cheap in many areas in the US. The grid emission needs more clean up and faster charging networks installed.

I don't know how credible that source is and EPA doesn't use such practice to compare (to my knowledge).

Another commonly used one is the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) that also includes manufacturing of the vehicle and the fuel(s) usage. That level of comparison is way out of my league. Perhaps we can take a stab at it.

If Volt blends more and keep the same peak power, its engine/motor/battery can downsize and lower the weight -- becoming more efficient.

He is paying for Wind electricity but actually consuming Coal electricity (mostly) due to the nature of the grid. Yet, he is claiming he consumes Wind electricity because he paid for it. It is a touchy issue.

Prius simplified mechanical parts and maximized the role of electric motors and use them for propulsion, starting gas engine, generating electricity and part of eCVT.

The battery (claimed as a dead weight on the highway) is also part of the transmission because it assists in multiplying torque.

GM spin the dead weight and played it as a "backup" to subside the fear (range anxiety). A lot of smart people actually bought it and went along with it. That's surprising to me on so many levels.

Well, there is no range anxiety in PHEV that runs on gasoline so GM marketed Volt is an EV. We all agree now that Volt is not an EV but a subset of plugin hybrid (PHEV).

A new study came out and concluded that optimal range for plugin hybrid is 11 to 21 miles range. If Volt were to be competitive, it'll need to reduce the EV range and blend more and utilize the gas engine more.

 

Prius was configured to be affordable from day one. Both engine & battery were carefully chosen to deliver a balance of operation verses cost, in no way trying to be a top-performing vehicle. It focused on need, not want. Volt most definitely didn't take that approach.

Perhaps the next generation will be fundamentally different. But based on what we're hearing from enthusiasts, that change isn't going to be welcomed with open arms. Fortunately, it will be appealing to the masses.

That's why I have been for years suggesting a second model with different priorities... and no amount of "exactly the same" arguing will change that. They are not.

 

Electrons are inherently fungible commodity. They don't actually go very far, they just vibrate in the line to provide power. I paid for some wind-based energy to go into the line, and I take some power/vibrations out of the line at my end. The government guidelines say it is appropriate to say I consume what I bought, and have regulations in place to ensure no-one else claims what I bought. It is only touchy for people that what to put down EVs to prop up their irrational belief that using gasoline is better. If if I was using coal, it would be overall better for the environment. But I can choose to buy cleaner sources, just as I choose to buy hook-caught sustainable fish and organic veggies.

My state grew its wind power generation by 26% in 2012, (Colorado’s wind-power capacity seen growing by 26% in 2012 - Denver Business Journal) adding some 465Megawatts, and so people buying wind power does matter. (And wind energy is actually highestest at night, which is why I'm paying for that rather than solar.

That said, I can and likely will switch my power even farther down the renewable direction. With some (hopeful) changes in our regulations I will soon be adding solar as well, to generate 150% of my total usage + still buy 100% of the net-difference as wind energy at night. (So I'll be pumping out solar during the day and buying wind at night, allowing me to actually help clean up someones else's grid as well).

With a EREV, one has a choice of fuel, and can shift much more to be renewable.

 

The ELR increases peak power, and I can only assume this is by blending, it is also heavier and less efficient.

Downsizing the battery in terms of energy means you are downsizing the AER, I think they are striving for 40 miles aer, and are at 38. That would mean down sizing would be counter productive. Many have speculated that the peak hp rating of the ice could be increased and this would might increase efficiency. An ice like the ecoboost 1L, Nissan miller 1.2L, skyactiv 1.6L, even the Toyota 1.8L atkinson all have technology that might improve efficiency on long trips but generate more peak power. Blending might get 0-60 closer to the camry hybrid though The driver could choose when to accelerate faster and when to stay all electric.

 

Me? I'm not so much into the whole "green thing" and see using a cleaner fuel as a wonderful but side benefit. Rather, it's the awesome driving experience that full EV power provides. My old Gen3 prius gave me my first, albeit small, taste of it so I couldn't wait for something to get to market that would meet my driving range needs. That I can drive "normally" and skip the hyper-miling type games yet still achieve unbelievable efficiencies and running costs (about $55/month) is the proverbial icing on the cake.

Multiplied by 365, that's only 4,ooo to 7,600 miles a year. Did you mean per trip?

 

11 to 21 miles is the optimal range for the balance between cost and range. Per EPA, that'll cover 29% to 48% with EV miles. The rest can be covered by the on board gas engine (the more efficient, the better).

The last time I glanced at its preliminary spec, range was 35 miles. I wasn't talking about ELR but re-tuning the Volt with more blending while keeping the same max power.

 

GM already has done the NRE to do a blended mode on the voltec system for the ELR. You read my response. Blended mode decreases efficiency, but allows the driver to decide when they want more power.

Why would GM now spend more engineering resources on the volt to create a second blended mode but with lower AER? That seems counter productive unless battery costs were an issue. It is likely that the DOE is correct and batteries are on the path to $300/kwh. That would amount to a future cost to gm of $5000/battery pack on the 16.5Kwh volt. Any cost savings of reducing the pack size would get quickly eaten up by engineering and tooling costs. On down powering the ice again blended mode does nothing here. The ice is already blended with battery power when peak power is required. Increasing peak ice power may be worthwhile as it would get rid of mountain mode and might make hwy mileage better if done right. I haven't seen anything that says a smaller battery pack would greatly increase electrical efficiency. The volt is at 98 mpge, the heavier tesla S 60kwh is at 95 mpge, the lighter leaf is at 99 mpge.

 

ELR does not use the next gen Voltec. I am talking about if the next gen Volt were to optimize by blending. Two different things.

You are talking about different efficiency as well. You are talking about the vehicle efficiency gained by shifting into electricity (big MPGe numbers), by the mean of raw EV ratio.

I am talking about the breakdown of both electric efficiency and gas efficiency. Blending increases efficiency for both fuel if you look at the breakdown.

Higher EV ratio sacrifices efficiency of both powertrain, due to the weight of the battery. However, the nature of big MPGe number from electricity (ignoring fuel production) masks that.

 

200 MPG is an arbitrary benchmark and name calling isn't constructive.

EV-BOOST that the plug-in Prius offers is a great example blending. While cruising along the highway at 70 mph, I see a reading of over 100 MPG.

Isn't that significant increase in efficiency through use of electricity augmentation the point?

When you add on the overhead for the battery (controller hardware & liquid cooling) along with both electric motors and the charging system, it would still too expensive to be competitive. It will continue to have a difficult time attracting sales away from traditional vehicles.

 

Hmm, fueleconomy.gov and the EPA window stickers use 15,000 miles for a yearly avg but I avg 22k/yr.

22,000-4,000EV(11mi)=18,000mi/50mpg(Prius or similar)=360gals
22,000-7,600EV(21mi)=14,400mi/43mpg (Energi or similar)=334 gals
22,000-17,160mi(78%EV for me)=4840mi/37mpg(Volt)=138 gals

More EV range works better for me especially since I can't usually get an opportunity charge during the day. YMMV (literally)

Another benefit of using electricity for my main source of fuel is long term price stability. Here in Texas, we can buy pricing contracts up to 3 years in length (maybe longer?). Does anyone know what you'll be paying for gas in 2016?

 

Whatever suits your needs and wants.

Just remember that shifting higher EV ratio requires more electricity and gas per mile (translate to more emission). If you look at the breakdown of both, you'll see Volt consume more Wh per mile and less miles to a gallon than PiP or Energi.