Travel for nothing and your volts for free
The Coyote isn’t buying GM’s 230-mpg figure for the Chevy Volt:
Apparently, MPG while running on batteries is treated as infinite! In other words, electricity is treated as “free” and not costing anthing in terms of fuel. Check out how the math is done:
“When gasoline is providing the power, the Volt might get as much as 50 mpg. But that mpg figure would not take into account that the car has already gone 40 miles with no gas at all. So let’s say the car is driven 50 miles in a day. For the first 40 miles, no gas is used and during the last 10 miles, 0.2 gallons are used. That’s the equivalent of 250 miles per gallon. But, if the driver continues on to 80 miles, total fuel economy would drop to about 100 mpg. And if the driver goes 300 miles, the fuel economy would be just 62.5 mpg.”
It should be noted here that EPA’s original city-mileage test was calculated on an 11-mile run, and the highway test on 10.3. The Volt can do both without ever dipping into the fuel tank. The new 2008 EPA test regime covers 43.9 miles. (All these miles are actually rolled up on a dyno: see, for instance, the September Car and Driver for a detailed description short on governmental jargon.)
Still, the problem is that electricity apparently comes out of the sky, and not in the lightning sense either:
This is entirely consistent with the bizarre way electric cars have always been treated by environmentalists and politicians, as if the electricity is free and they have no hydrocarbon use or CO2 production. Which is weird, since we get harangued for our incandescent light bulbs destroying the world when we plug them in but plugging in a whole car does not?
It would be interesting to see what would happen if GM, or somebody, built a big ol’ sport-utility electric vehicle. (Too late, I suspect, for Hummer: they have the perfect name already.)
Meanwhile, the EPA is distancing itself from that number:
EPA has not tested a Chevy Volt and therefore cannot confirm the fuel economy values claimed by GM. EPA does applaud GM’s commitment to designing and building the car of the future — an American-made car that will save families money, significantly reduce our dependence on foreign oil and create good-paying American jobs. We’re proud to see American companies and American workers leading the world in the clean energy innovations that will shape the 21st century economy.
Heck, even 99 mpg sounds good.
Tom »
12 August 2009 · 9:37 am
Hybrids will quickly have us calculating (properly) TOTAL COST per mile, so you’ll simply need to know your gasoline cost per gallon and electricity cost per kilowatt hour. The average cost in the U.S. for the latter is 8.62 cents (source: wisegeek.com).
CGHill »
12 August 2009 · 9:43 am
Still, this fluctuates almost as much as the price of gasoline, and worse, there are peak rates and off-peak rates, often in the same day, which means that the EPA’s One Number For All approach is simply not feasible for mostly-electric vehicles.
Total cost per mile is, of course, the number you really want to know, but I suspect the EPA will flee from that idea.
McGehee »
12 August 2009 · 9:49 am
Somebody on another blog commented that in the U.S. electric cars are really mostly coal-powered.
Next time I see some smug SOB in an electric car, I’m gonna tell him, “Nice carbon footprint, you planet-killer!”
jen »
12 August 2009 · 9:55 am
OFF SUBJECT: The other day, I stumbled upon an Okie blog. The writer said he’d been a prolific blogger from 2005-06 when “this thing” (I assume blogging) was still new. I laughed and thought of you – hacking away 10 years before that. TR and I have decided we need to meet Dustbury in person. Can you let him know? LOL!
CGHill »
12 August 2009 · 9:55 am
We’re already seeing sniping at the Volt from Nissan, which has an EV called (gag) “Leaf” with no gas engine at all. Someone at Nissan tweeted:
I figure their 367 is at least as illusory as Chevy’s 230.
CGHill »
12 August 2009 · 9:59 am
Heck, Steve Lackmeyer will probably vouch for my existence: he caught me (and, for that matter, Trini) one afternoon at Cuppies & Joe.
McGehee »
12 August 2009 · 10:14 am
No gas required? 367 miles per gallon of what, then? Hubcap polish?
CGHill »
12 August 2009 · 10:18 am
Blinker fluid.
McGehee »
12 August 2009 · 1:17 pm
That reminds me, I’m running low.
Daniel »
12 August 2009 · 1:28 pm
Haha, I had the same question, McGehee. Maybe sweat equity? Though I think whoever thought up the name “Leaf” needs to find a different profession, they have a point. GM’s hyped up “extended range EV” really isn’t all that impressive compared to the competition. Granted, the Volt will go farther than the Leaf, but for most people, how often is that going to matter?
Well, I’m a skeptic until we get it out on the road and see how it compares to the competition in the real world. I’d also point y’all to the video at http://www.newsy.com/videos/all_charged_up_over_the_volt, which hits a couple of the top arguments both criticizing and praising the Volt. I thought it was a good approach, considering most everyone else is either on one side or the other (which isn’t a bad thing, but it’s nice to see both sides in one place)
Cary »
12 August 2009 · 1:34 pm
I just would like to say that you got robbed on
not winning the thing at the Gazette.