plug-in states and ghg

I think you are trying to say that a Prius, or a plug-in that uses the grid have similar carbon footprints. This is true for states with relatively low carbon intensity grids like CA, and not true for many states that have considerable input from coal.

I thought this had been beaten to death; I must have posted this conclusion 100 times over the past 2-3 years.

 

I'd guess hs point was that "average" that certain people keep pointing out is ignoring distribution of where hybrids/EVs sell, and when one considers that distribution, the GHG from sales of EV/PHEVs in those states brings the "average" down.. so that even on a weighted average sense, PHEV/EV is winning. (I've made the argument but never pulled the data to compute the average.. so kudos for Austingreen for doing it).

 

The people that push the idea of an 'average' grid are usually *EV advocates who are tying to ignore the reality of marginal emissions. The somewhat over-simplified truth is that local marginal electricity production determines the carbon footprint of the grid using *EV owner. The footprint ranges from combusted NG to combusted coal. Most people fall somewhere between the two extremes.

E.g., pretty much all electricity use in my city of Albuquerque is from one of the most polluting, inefficient coal plants still operating in the US -- the San Juan power plant. About 27% energy efficiency power-plant to wall, and emission pollutants that are off the wall. So while I really like the LEAF, I cannot buy one without increasing my carbon footprint and other pollutants dramatically.

I know the standard answer is: put up PV. It is not a bad answer in general, but it does not work for me.

 

It is clear that PiP has the optimal battery size to lower emission no matter which states it got sold. Using US average electricity, it raised the bar with 210 g/mi. This is out of the box experience without the need for "special" electricity nor pay extra for the faster charger. You also get the same cargo space and don't lose a rear seat.

It is a relief that that most of the Volt sold are in CA. If most gets sold in WV or CO, the emission will be much higher. The appeal would be limited nation wide.

 

It is not an optimal battery size for lowering GHG in a place with clean energy.. the lower GHG of the PHV is because the Prius started with a more efficient and cleaner engine -- if the PHV had a larger battery it would have even lower GHG. It maybe optimal for profits, or balancing their idea of space constraints.. but not GHG for anyone using clean energy. And if they don't have clean energy, then better off not using EV mode.

 

It's hard to get a lot from this data, other than CA is obvious market leader for Plug-Ins.
More interesting data would be Plug-Ins as % of car sales per state, and then we could try to understand why?
Some states may be higher due to green attitudes, some higher due to business reasons (eg; Leaf factory in TN), some higher due to state incentives. But this is really quite early stage to draw conclusions as PiP for example has not yet rolled out nationally. Also Plug-Ins % of sales is small compared to hybrids.

Not sure why hybrids so popular in VA except to say quite a few long commutes here, so even with zero state/fed tax incentives, people see the cost reduction merit of hybrids. But I could not add that in since Hybrids were excluded from the post.

 

I don't know the weighted average for PiP because I have not seen the sales breakdown. CA should be the biggest market for PiP and it is rated 190 g/mi there. The weighted average should be somewhere between 190 and 210 g/mi and that's from a midsize plugin. For a compact plugin, I would expect its emission to be lower than a midsize one.

 

Not every state has clean electricity. For a plugin to sell in all the states, you'll have to consider the worse case scenario, not just the best case. In that sense, PiP has the optimal battery size because using average electricity, it lowers emission over a regular Prius.

Are you suggesting a manufacture to design a unique model for each state or region?

Here is the emission of PiP and Volt by states. Do we need a new Volt model (with less EV range and more efficient gas engine) for those states with red spikes?

 

I can see CA and WA are lower carbon fuels due to hydro availability, but the other states like FL pretty heavy on coal/nukes. Low carbon intensity doesn't impress much per se...for me we need a way to calculate electric generation eco. impact whereas something like nukes has an significant impact/cost. I would agree home solar is low impact, but little fuzzy to say green elec can be justly pro-rated to EV's use and that makes EV green. Yes this is the vision of many EV supporters, but not universally agreed to.

 

Every state has the option of clean electricity -- just like every driver has the option of buying a clean car or a SUV, you pay your money you get your choice.

If you want to argue optimal, lets see something formal. If the PiP can lower emmisions over a regular prius with its current battery, than a larger battery would lower it more. The weight from a slightly bigger battery is very small compared to the energy difference between CD and CS Modes.
If you want to argue that the weight gain would be more than offset by losses lets see some estimations.


We dont' need unique models for each region.. if you buy a PHEV, just pay for green energy. If your state supplies it you are probably already just paying for it via higher rates (like Cali) so you don't need to pay extra. If you are in a state that does not pay have it by default, then step up and buy renewable.

In terms of PHEV/EV, for anyone that really cares abotu GHG (not all do), your chart is only useful for people to know if they need to buy renewable.

 

I was wondering about this claim too. From USB's past posts I suspect he was relying on the idea that short trips avoided on a cold ICE by using battery are greener than long trips where the ICE has warmed up.

Put another way: EV beats a 35 mpg ICE, but not a 50 mpg ICE. I'm not really sure this pans out in practice, but it is an interesting thought.

 

I don't think Toyota's objective is to squeeze the government incentive dry. PiP was designed to be practical yet produce measurable results in gasoline saving and lowering emission. I think they balanced it out very well for being a global plugin.

US government incentive is not tied to the goal (of saving gas or lowering emission) but rather to the battery size. It should be updated to promote the goal.

C-Max Energi (7.6 kWh) cargo:


PiP (prototype with 5.2 kWh) cargo floor raised:


Production PiP (4.4 kWh) cargo:


Clearly, PiP battery size was chosen to not rob any cargo space or a rear seat.

 

According to EIA, 13% of the electricity is from renewable. Cars are not the only thing that consume it. So a plugin that is only clean when running on renewable clean electricity would have a limited appeal.

As mass-produced plugin need to be cleaner than a regular hybrid using average electricity. That's what Toyota did with PiP and GM fell short with Volt.

Not necessarily. C-Max Energi (240 g/mi) increased emission slightly vs the hybrid model (236 g/mi). That's because the gas engine efficiency sufferer from the extra weight. The battery also robbed a good chunk of the cargo space.
The cost-effectiveness of adding more battery goes down as the battery size increases in plugin hybrids.

 

...FYI see my comments on "EPA" Cargo space under the PiP sticky re: Plug-In comparisons.
Pics are good! It can be hard to compare cargo space based on specs because in EPA apparently allows quoting with seats down etc, so when you read the spec numbers these days you have no idea what the basis is. I agree that PiP has about 15.6 cu ft ~= 15.7 cu ft (GenIII) based on Canada specs.

 

Interesting point, but USBs data was based on EPA numbers which have no model for short trips and ICE avoidance.
If they did, the Volt would car much better in the testing. Instead the models for emission testing, using J1711 standard do run multiple cycles (UCCS and HWY) with depleted and full charges and then average. Since 63% of the trips have no ICE starts, one would think that would be good for emissions, but the current test procedures don't actually work that way. For the CD testing, they run it until it does start (so it always has at least one cold start) and then let it finish that cycle. So in their testing there are always "emissions" for the CD legs. For the CS, they run cycles after the battery is at minimum SOC, and measure emissions. They then take a weighted combination of the two based on standard utility factors. Their models for emissions does not include any model of engine starts, just miles. It is also significant that the CD, which for the volt is the heavier weighted section, has an emissions penalty (with a cold start) so the utility factor ignores that for trips < AER, the car would have no emissions. So while the PiP reducing short-trip starts is a good thing, that is not visible in in the GHG or EPA emissions data.

 

WV has among the best tax incentives for Plug-Ins because they feel coal instead of gaso is a good thing.
So don't rule out WV....check out the mayor's vanity plate below.

Mayor meets with fellow electric-car owners&nbsp; - News - The Charleston Gazette - West Virginia News and Sports -