ETV Motors challenges EPA on emerging plug-in MPG rules
ETV Motors, the company behind the modified Prius with an extended-range microtubrine, believes that the EPA's emerging MPG methodology for plug-in vehicles – the one that allowed GM to proclaim a 230 mpg rating for the Chevy Volt and which Nissan used to say the all-electric Leaf gets 367 mpg – is clear as mud. The system makes it difficult for a consumer to relate to the resulting numbers "in any meaningful way to actual vehicle performance." ETV wrote an open letter that also says:The gist of ETV's complaint is that "traditional 'miles per gallon' metrics provide consumers with precious little meaningful data on which to base a purchase decision," which we agree with. ETV wants the EPA to "play a leadership role in defining a well-articulated, rational and consumer-sensitive set of vehicle efficiency measurement regulations" for the U.S. This is all fine and good. The trouble is that there isn't a simple alternative. ETV makes the case for a three-number system:The economy, the environment, the industry and the needs of citizens in the United States and beyond all need something much better than what is being communicated by the automotive industry today.
- All Electric Range (the distance a vehicle driven under normal driving conditions can expect to achieve when operating in purely-electric mode)
- Energy Efficiency in All Electric Mode (the energy efficiency of the vehicle in its All Electric Range)
- Fuel Efficiency in Charge-Sustain Mode (a measure of fuel efficiency for range extended electric vehicles such as the Chevy Volt)
[Source: ETV Motors]
ETV's LETTER TO THE EPA:
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
alex 7:28PM (9/26/2009)
emergine? Seriously? In the headline? Get a damn editor.
Reply
Sebastian 4:42AM (9/27/2009)
whoops. fixed.
Bill 11:41AM (9/28/2009)
see also "microtubrine"
Nick From Montreal 10:45PM (9/26/2009)
Bravo! The EPA will not get away with this kind of garbage. With GM, they already see what kind of push-back they will get from consumers. Honesty is not in the genes of the auto industry.
In the next few years, basic education on electricity principle is going to be very important. The more people understand the numbers, the less the automakers will be able to get away with marketing-optimized mumbo-jumbo. EVs are *simplier* than ICE engines -- there's no need for mumbo-jumbo.
Nikki Bloomfield (http://www.aminorjourney.com/) from the EV-Cast did an great job a few shows back explaining basic battery and electric motors principles. I wish this material was made available graphically on the web for people to look up.
Reply
meme 10:59PM (9/26/2009)
It's really, really simple.
If You Have Two Distinct Drive Modes, You Get Two Stickers
Is that that tough? Whatever sort of details go on sticker (such as city mpg, highway mpg, pollution score, or range on a full tank/charge) go on the other, too.
Reply
letstakeawalk 3:24AM (9/27/2009)
I agree. This seems like the simplest solution.
Satn 2:30AM (9/27/2009)
3 numbers is too much for you, really?
2 (or 1) extra numbers just break something in your brain and turn you into a drooling lump of indecision?
Reply
skierpage 3:41AM (9/27/2009)
I like their system! Here's an example of it from their letter:
An Extended Range Electric Vehicle, such as the GM Volt, which can use both
electric energy and traditional fuel, might be presented by these measures:
All Electric Range: ................................................................... 40 miles
Energy Efficiency in All Electric Mode:........................... 30 miles per 10kWh
Fuel Efficiency in Charge-Sustain Mode: ...................................52 mpg
European-style "How far you go on one gallon or on 10 kWh" is actually a more useful number, but I guess USA is stuck with distance per energy unit because of the history of "mpg".
They are implicitly simplifying the current EPA system which restates MPG three times: overall, city, highway. I'd like to see all 9 numbers
All Electric Range: ............................................... 40 miles (53 city / 27 highway)
Energy Efficiency in All Electric Mode:................... 30 miles per 10kWh (39 / 20)
Fuel Efficiency in Charge-Sustain Mode: ................52 mpg (43 / 55)
The city / highway would be much smaller font.
Reply
Chris M 7:23PM (9/27/2009)
Actually, the European style is "how many liters fuel is used for 100 Km", or fuel used for a certain distance, as opposed to the US style of "how many miles per 1 gallon of fuel".
The European method emphasizes fuel savings, the US method how far you can go. US citizens aren't particularly used to metric measures, but they might like a "gallons per 100 miles" measurement.
Laurens 7:34AM (9/27/2009)
I own a classic car. It's mileage in town is not excellent. So I cycle. Motorway mileage is excellent, also compared with similar type of modern cars.
Maybe we should leave it to the intelligence of the buyer. And/or leasing company, who quote full operational rates, including fuel, and have excellent actual fuel consumption records and are able to predict what new vehicles will consume (maybe because they have good relationships with car companies and get the real data).
The only thing that then has to happen is that governments implement a CO2 tax. On fuel, and also on electricity. For the latter variable rates should be implemented, to work with varying availabilities of green power. If you want to load your EV during peak, the penalty has to be substantial! Same for quick charging, because of the infrastructure costs.
Reply
Dave 9:11AM (9/27/2009)
This three number system may help consumers (or maybe not since anyone buying a plug in hybrid in the near future is an early adopter who is probably flushing thousands of dollars down the toilet) but the EPA still needs a single combined number for CAFE calculations.
Reply
Roy 9:29AM (9/27/2009)
Like most other commenters, I agree with the proposed 3 number system. Anybody smart enough to earn the money to buy a new car is smart enough to understand the 3 number system. Why do some people think this is too complicated? Maybe its too complicated for the people who object to the 3 number system.
Reply
Glenn Mercer 3:05PM (9/27/2009)
Sorry to pile on (maybe these errors are due to Mr. Safire's passing away), but what is a tubrine?
Reply
Roy 4:38PM (9/27/2009)
Good catch on the mis-spell of turbine. http://green.autoblog.com/2009/04/26/etvmotors-announces-funding-for-range-extended-ev-w-micro-turbin/
Think of it as a miniature jet engine.
fred schumacher 4:28PM (9/27/2009)
Joules per kilometer would be universal measure of fuel use that could apply to all vehicles. If the measure is based on the original source of the electric power, then a truer comparison between electric and ICE operation would be possible, since it would take into account the efficiency of the entire network and the true amount of total energy required to move the vehicle a set distance.
Reply
JustZisGuy 11:20AM (9/28/2009)
Agreed, but given that consumers are used to measuring energy in kWh, I would suggest that rather than Joules. Or, rather, MJ; 1 kWh = 3.6 MJ.
If you know how many kWh are consumed per unit distance, and you know the cost per kWh, then you can easily calculate the energy cost per unit distance.
Roy 4:43PM (9/27/2009)
Yes, but since electricity can be made in so many ways, how do you decide which one to publish? You don't know where a given consumer gets their electricty from.
Reply
jamesFF 8:54PM (9/27/2009)
My Idea would have been "Chevrolet Volt 50MPG + 40Mi electric".
Reply
Ghen 9:02AM (9/28/2009)
People won't understand the idea that it's the first 40 miles though and wouldn't be able to wrap their heads around the math as to comparing this to normal mpg. Hence the stop-gap solution for specifically that problem. It's obviously biased towards electric vehicles, but that's good since they're on our side ;)
why not the LS2LS7? 11:30PM (9/27/2009)
This is badly needed. The MPGe (in name only) figures for EVs and the proposed formula for plug-ins are just too distorted for the average person to get any useful info from them.
Reply