Featured Not alone in feeling that Toyota is missing the EV-boat (article)

Probably because, as far as ICE only powered cars are concerned the Prius (at 50+ mpg) is an outlier. And people would use the fact that there is an ICE car that emits slightly less than the worse (or a single) EV as the proof they need that BEV are bad.

Additionally, you have to take into account that an ICE car will never emit less CO2 per mile after it is built and sold. But an EV can (and probably will) emits less over its lifetime as the overall grid improves.

Here is a good study that compares every state. Its old (2016) and EVs have improved a lot since then (Model 3 is 50% better than Model S...while ICE cars have barely change)

Fact #950: November 7, 2016 Well-to-Wheel Emissions from a Typical EV by State, 2015 | Department of Energy

Mike

​

 

EPA and EIA both use the same data which in basic terms tries to calculate the ghg emissions and both go down to statewide levels, but EPA often lags in updating so their data is older. They try to use the amount of ghg from the well head or mine to the plug and divide by the power at the plug which includes transmission losses.

Numbers for both gasoline and electricity are both likely low as they likely undercount the impact of ghg at the oil or natural gas well head and in coal beds along with no count for manufacturing of turbines or panels or refineries etc. Big oil and natural gas pipeline Leaks like the oil leak in california are not counted. These can likely be all reduced by greater investment in infrastructure, but that needs to be mandated, fines are typically very small compared to actually fixing the infrastructure for gasoline. The energy to build refineries, pipelines, turbines, panels is also not counted.

My utility lets me know that about 65% of my solar output goes directly in my house. Peak time in austin is during sunny times the summer. That's where my solar helps the grid the most, so I charge only at night then, and whenever other times of the year. My impact is lowest charging when there is surplus wind on the grid, and not charging when the solar panels are producing the most. I generate a surplus during the winter, and will often charge during the day then. This will reduce transmission losses taking my solar to the grid then getting it back, although these are pretty small when we are talking about only charging a car.

 

Hey a Toyota Technician said yesterday that Toyota plans to have an EV Truck by 2025....Tundra!!

 

Yes that is true in one sense .. but if you choose not to charge your car one day (i.e. ride your bike) then your solar production will be exported and so a fossil fuel generator can be scaled back. So your decision to charge and not export will then result in an incremental fossil fuel being burnt and so regardless of whether you technically use your own power ... the CO2 emission rating of your electricity use is still based on the CO2 intensity of the grid in your area.

 

The problem with the Tundra is that its really hard to make out the grill. I mean I know it should be at the front somewhere between the headlights .. but it's just really hard to make out.

 

And if your local grid intensity doesn't include your solar production?

The EIA can only estimate how much distributed renewable production is out there.

 

This is one of the areas where there are legitimate arguments could be made for multiple numbers. On the eastern grid without many smart devices it is difficult to determine the effects of individual solar. I would simply use the average for the state. In Austin we are on a smart grid run partially by a municipal utility and partially by ERCOT which covers most of Texas. The utility knows its plans for changing over the next decade including the elimination of coal and more wind and solar. When I purchased wind it was on a 10 year contract, and that paid for the excess costs to the turbines and grid upgrades. I felt that I could legitamately use that as my personal use, but also would not disagree with those that gave me a higher grid rating. I knew in my heaviest air conditioning usage the utility was calling on my natural gas, but now the utility owns the turbines so cost to all customers is lower, and it encouraged more wind to be built.

For my solar panels, the utility subsidized them because it wants more solar to help reduce peak natural gas usage in the summer. If my group hadn't installed they would have raised the subsidy enough for someone to do it. It is not a great deal like it is in california, if you assume a 3% loan it will pay for itself over 13 years, but its warranted for 25 years and likely will last longer if hail doesn't kill it. I installed in 2019. The utility has a box that tells how much I am producing, how much goes out to the grid (35%), and how much comes in from the grid. I can access this monthly, and my by the minute production on the web. So I could calculate, but I'm subsidized so since austin energy is paying, I will use texas average CO2 intensity which is higher than Austin's.

My previous 2010 prius is rated at 214 g CO2/mile upstream and down stream. The new prius eco is rated at 191 g/mile. My 2018 tesla model 3 AWD long range gets 140 g/mile, the current more efficient one 120 g/mile using fuel economy.gov for texas. Taking a high estimate of building my model 3, it probably took 60 g/mile more than my prius (still driving but sold out of the household) over 150,000 miles. Not much difference 14g/mile less than the 2010 prius. The current tesla is less carbon intense in manufacturing. On a dirtier grid the tesla would come out worse, but most plug-ins are sold in places with cleaner grids and as more are sold the local grids in the US seem to be getting cleaner. Adjusting the figures for my personal use case, the prius consumed 12% more energy than epa estimates, the tesla 10% more but I use sentry mode and this draws power for a feature not available on the prius or any non modified car in 2009 when I bought it.

 

Yes, if its behind the meter and you consume some or all of what you produce, then the grid does not 'know' about your full renewable energy is. However that does not really change the incremental CO2, because if you don't charge your car one day, that power not used by you and will get exported and allow someone else to use less fossil power and so your decision to use your own solar strill results in incremental CO2.

So the way I see it, unless you are totally disconnected from the grid, your use of grid power or your own solar power results in the same CO2 / kWh rating and that is the average for the grid in your area.

 

Purchasing green power makes a lot of sense if it actually results in increasing the installed based of renewable. However here in Australia there is no requirement for this to be done and so if there is excess renewable then it gets assigned to you but nothing actually gets incrementally built. That's why I think home solar is good .. because it definitely adds capacity. On the down side. home solar is small scale and thus inefficient compared to industrial solar or wind.

 

And if you forget to turn on the A/C, don't do the wash, eat out, etc. that energy is put out into the grid. Why single out the EV?

 

Yes it's any electrical usage. People buy solar for their AC in summer and say their usage is carbon free ... but it's not because once they have installed the capacity and become a generator, if they decide not to turn on the AC there will be a CO2 reduction of approximately the CO2 grid intensity based usage. Now buying solar is still worthwhile but it does not change the CO2 impact of using electricity (well it does change it by by a very very small amount).

The real solution is to keep reducing the grid C02 intensity each year by 3-4% or whatever is possible. Here in Australia we are about 810 g/kWh and reducing at about 3-4% per annum.

 

I don’t believe this is true.
I am still looking for information about the grid rating and how it is calculated.
In the USA, I don’t believe ‘small residential producers’ are included in those calculations.
However, I have yet to find details one way or the other.

It seems to me, you are thinking about this backwards. My solar panels lower the grid average weather included in the calculations or not.

 

Based on posting history, it looks like that poster has a goal to denigrate any renewable using 'funny' arithmetic. He also seems to think EV owners are driven by 'green' and ignores the obvious operating savings. But this isn't the first time (nor last) when 'anti-green' arguments are posted here. So 'pat them on the head' and look elsewhere for original and accurate content.

BTW, the original title of this thread, "Not alone in feeling that Toyota is missing the EV-boat (article)" suggests this thread has wandered into the wilderness.

Bob Wilson

 

Those small producers might be included.
This does Electricity Data Browser, but monthly is the smallest time frame, which doesn't help in saying where a household's electricity is flowing too.

The table here doesn't include small producers, but the article does mention a generation figure. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) A footnote states "Most small-scale PV systems are at or near the location where the electricity is consumed". So using a grid average, that covers a large market area, or even the entire state, isn't going to be a household's actual emission if their neighbor has solar.

And that small solar generation figure is just an estimate. The reality is that the utility and EIA can't see exactly what is going on behind the net meter. They just see what goes in and what comes out. Nothing going in is that same as being off grid in terms of emissions.

It's thinking meant to slow solar adoption. If being off grid is the only legitimate accounting for a zero carbon home, the households that can do that won't help the rest, and those can't go that far may completely pass on installing PV panels. Which have an extended pay off period when just looking at the financial side.

The last poster making this argument was a hydrogen supporter. Is this one a coal miner?

Sometimes neat things are found among the weeds.

I think everything that can be said about the OP has been. Until we see a real BEV from Toyota, they will continue to work against them in the market. At this point, we don't even know if their announced BEV line is real. That is, one that isn't really an engineering or marketing test.

 

Yes solar works in displacing CO2, whether you use it directly or someone else uses it when you export it. Either way it has the same CO2 benefit. However if you use an electrical appliance, whether you have solar or not, you are still causing emissions at the CO2 intensity of the grid at that time. The reason why this is so, is that if you don't use the electricity, some fossil fuel generator in the grid will be able dial down and thus there will be a CO2 saving.

Now the CO2 intensity of the grid can be measured in different ways. You can use the Governments average annual figures. If you want to get more granular you could look at the intensity at different times of the year or different times of the day. Whatever figure you use for the grid intensity of the local grid, it's always going to to be an estimate and that's why its probably best just to use the average annual value.

If rooftop solar is not included because it is not measured or not reported, then really it should be estimated and included. I can't see anything that confirms one way or another but the UCS uses those national annualised figures for all of their reporting.

 

Recent facts and data about this thread title:


The troll spoiled the thread. Time for PLOINK him … nothing of his worth reading.

Bob Wilson

 

Prepandemic, Toyota had talked about showing off solid state batteries along side hydrogen at the past Olympics. A prototype or visible test mule would have been part of that. I didn't think Toyota would just shelve it with what happened to the Olympic schedule.

A recent report from Toyota(there's a thread here about it) stated there was still issues with their solid state, and the first production versions would likely be in a hybrid.

Those companies with EVs out haven't stopped developing better batteries, and there are several companies doing solid state. Even if Toyota beats them with a working SS battery, it will be more expensive on introduction. Putting out a more expensive EV isn't going to help them with market share.

 

The only customer base so far proven willing to absorb premium costs that would come with the introduction of a SS battery based BEV would be in the luxury car price range. And unlike hydrogen, would probably be hard to get those generous government subsidies and dribble these out as engineering/marketing test vehicles.

 

BOB ... I have read your posts over many years ... I'm not sure what has happened. In my view this forum is about respectfully debating the issues and not degenerating to the standards we regularly see on other forums.

 

For those interested in Toyota EV news:
Solid State prototype | PriusChat

Bob Wilson