US proposes to slash EV mileage ratings to meet fuel economy rules

[silvrsvt]

32 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

People claim we will eliminate coal soon (let’s hope that’s correct), but natural gas will be around for a very long time.  In the mean time, as long as grid isn’t truly green, driving large inefficient BEVs is actually worse than driving efficient hybrids.  So yeah, a BEV pickup driven for personal use 95% of time per your estimate above (which I agree) will generate more GHGs for decades than compact hybrids.

 

If we are going the BEV route, vehicles need to be at least as efficient as a Tesla Model 3 that can do up to 5 miles per kWh in city driving; and that will reduce CO2 to about 110 grams per mile.  We need to at least break even, otherwise why bother if making matters worse.

 

In all seriousness, why the hang up with comparing a compact car with a truck? Your trying to force the market into a something it doesn't want. Automakers want to make a profit and that is far easier to do with a pickup vs a compact product. 

 

Just using the Lighting vs HEV F-150, the difference is huge-your looking at 429 combined with the HEV F-150 vs 210 or less for the Lighting.

 

Then you muddy the waters with making assumptions about battery manufacturing without taking any consideration for manufacturing of gasoline and transporting it and how that impacts Co2 emissions-at least with electricity-its "free" to transport it. 

[Rick73]

19 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

In all seriousness, why the hang up with comparing a compact car with a truck?

Seriously, because I want equitable solutions.  I find it extremely disturbing that a government entity can decide that it’s OK for some guy to drive a 9,000-pound BEV Hummer simply because it’s electric while at same time telling others that compact hybrids will not be good enough.  And the argument that we shouldn’t worry because it won’t happen for many years doesn’t work for me either.

 

Obviously everyone knows these two vehicle types are not physically comparable, but that’s not the intent of comparison.  What the choice represents is what matters.

[silvrsvt]

1 hour ago, Rick73 said:

Seriously, because I want equitable solutions.  I find it extremely disturbing that a government entity can decide that it’s OK for some guy to drive a 9,000-pound BEV Hummer simply because it’s electric while at same time telling others that compact hybrids will not be good enough.  And the argument that we shouldn’t worry because it won’t happen for many years doesn’t work for me either.

 

I think the issue is that your focused on keeping ICE in a hybrid form around for convenience vs limitations of what we currently have with BEVs. 

 

Its a complex situation-ICE will wither away over the next 10-20 years, while BEVs will become cheaper and have better options for range or charging situations during that same period. 

 

Like I said, if you can get a BEV that costs roughly 30K, charges to 250 miles range in 10 minutes as conveniently (locations) as fueling an ICE, there really isn't any reason to keep ICE around outside of long distance towing, till that situation gets sorted. 

 

I see the charging situation where I live at getting considerably better over the next 36 months, but we also have large population of Teslas and Mach Es in my area, with a smattering of Rivians and Lightnings. 

[rperez817]

1 hour ago, Rick73 said:

Seriously, because I want equitable solutions.  

 

That's a worthy goal Rick73. Ideally, automakers should provide solutions that go beyond cars and trucks themselves (whether BEV or not) to include micromobility and robotaxi services, along with collaboration with governments to "provide sustainable new transportation options, enhancing equity and access in the process". Ford did exactly this with its City Solutions initiative several years ago. City Solutions (ford.com)

 

Sadly, Ford scaled back these offerings significantly after it sold or shut down Chariot, GoBike, Spin, and ArgoAI.

[Rick73]

On 4/19/2023 at 8:36 AM, silvrsvt said:

I think the issue is that your focused on keeping ICE in a hybrid form around for convenience vs limitations of what we currently have with BEVs.

Not about convenience, but rather effectiveness.  You seem to keep ignoring that on average only 1/3 of energy used at electric power plants ends up in BEV batteries.  We can keep claiming BEVs are “so efficient compared to ICE”, but it’s not a useful analysis unless it is more comprehensive, and includes electrical power generation.

 

I’m not the one claiming the 1/3 estimate, though I agree it is reasonable.  That came from environmental study linked previously authored by environmentalist.

 

Additionally, to your other point, if or when batteries become much cheaper to manufacture, I’m 100% certain it will lead to larger, heavier, and less efficient BEVs that will require even more energy to accomplish the same task.  For instance, the new upcoming RAM pickup’s optional battery is larger than the Hummer’s 200 kWh, and more than twice the size of the standard Lightning battery.  It’s insane.  What’s next, 500 kWh heavy duty pickups as daily drivers?

 

I’m hoping the new rating system exposes that “BEV status” alone is not enough if we actually want to lower GHGs.

[silvrsvt]

33 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

Not about convenience, but rather effectiveness.  You seem to keep ignoring that on average only 1/3 of energy used at electric power plants ends up in BEV batteries.  We can keep claiming BEVs are “so efficient compared to ICE”, but it’s not a useful analysis unless it is more comprehensive, and includes electrical power generation.

 

I’m not the one claiming the 1/3 estimate, though I agree it is reasonable.  That came from environmental study linked previously authored by environmentalist.

 

The issue is engine themselves...an electric motor only loses about 20% of its power, where as ICE loses 40-60%

[Rick73]

On 4/19/2023 at 8:59 AM, rperez817 said:

 

That's a worthy goal Rick73. Ideally, automakers should provide solutions that go beyond cars and trucks themselves (whether BEV or not) to include micromobility and robotaxi services, along with collaboration with governments to "provide sustainable new transportation options, enhancing equity and access in the process". Ford did exactly this with its City Solutions initiative several years ago. City Solutions (ford.com)

 

Sadly, Ford scaled back these offerings significantly after it sold or shut down Chariot, GoBike, Spin, and ArgoAI.

Other recent decisions makes me think that new DOE rating is meant to promote more fuel-efficient conventional vehicles than simply promote BEVs.  Perhaps a combination of the two.  EPA will consider heavy duty motorhomes “vocational vehicles” for many years to come, and reduced standard from 228 to only 226 grams/ton-mile.  For all practical purposes, in my opinion they are giving the heaviest and least efficient RVs a pass on GHGs.

 

There seems to be a little backpedaling on requiring electrification of larger vehicles, at least for time being.

 

https://www.rvia.org/news-insights/good-news-motorhomes-still-considered-vocational-vehicles-new-epa-standards

[Rick73]

45 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

 

The issue is engine themselves...an electric motor only loses about 20% of its power, where as ICE loses 40-60%

What does that have to do with “total” GHGs?  With due respect, it appears you don’t understand the subject matter if you think electricity originates in vehicle batteries.

[rperez817]

On 4/13/2023 at 6:33 PM, rperez817 said:

PEF calculations are done in accordance with the regulatory approach in 49 U.S.C. 32905. Federal Register :: Electric and Hybrid Vehicle Research, Development, and Demonstration Program; Petroleum-Equivalent Fuel Economy Calculation

 

PEF = E_g * 1/0.15 * AF * DPF

where

E_g = Gasoline-equivalent energy content of electricity factor

1/0.15 = “Fuel content” factor (also called Section 32905 multiplier)

AF = Petroleum-fueled accessory factor

DPF = Driving pattern factor

 

Current PEF = 80,049 Wh/gal

Proposed PEF from DOE's analysis = 23,160 Wh/gal

 

Examples using original and proposed PEF.

Model	Current CAFE MPGe (PEF= 80,049 Wh/gal)	Proposed CAFE MPGe (PEF=23,160 Wh/gal)
Volkswagen ID.4	380.6	107.4
Ford F-150 Lightning	237.1	67.1
Chrysler Pacifica PHEV	88.2	59.5

[DeluxeStang]

On 4/12/2023 at 6:29 PM, Havelock said:

I don't see annual US sales staying anywhere near 10-13 million with this rush to electrics.  New cars are becoming a thing only rich people can afford, like the pre-Model T era.

Yes and no, I've found that brands are going a little nuts with the price of additional options and trim levels. But base models still represent a great value. Adjusted for inflation, a maverick hybrid is cheaper than a model T was. So it's not all bad. There will still be cheap cars out there, just don't go nuts with ticking all the options. 

[silvrsvt]

1 hour ago, Rick73 said:

What does that have to do with “total” GHGs?  With due respect, it appears you don’t understand the subject matter if you think electricity originates in vehicle batteries.

 

But it also doesn't take into account power from non GHG sources that can power BEVs either...renewables like Solar and Wind are going to be the big thing that replaces fossil fuels in the future. 

 

What it boils down to is that its a cumulative effect-its just not transportation, it's the power grid that will become more efficient with different sources of energy as time goes on.  

 

Ultimately focusing purely on transportation (ie hybrid powertrains) isn't going fix anything in the light duty transportation world when it comes to GHG. 

Powerplants are always generating power and are far easier to control from an emissions standpoint then ICE with a hybrid. Just from my own real world experience, getting 29 MPG around town driving with a hybrid isn't anything really worth writing home about. Yeah it was 13 years old, but still. 

[silvrsvt]

31 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

Yes and no, I've found that brands are going a little nuts with the price of additional options and trim levels. But base models still represent a great value. Adjusted for inflation, a maverick hybrid is cheaper than a model T was. So it's not all bad. There will still be cheap cars out there, just don't go nuts with ticking all the options. 

 

Just using the new Nautilus as an example-I was playing with the configurator and I had one option I picked for it on the base model...and it would have suited me perfectly fine. I went through this with my Bronco-I was looking at an Outer Banks vs the Big Bend I got...getting the 12 inch display and extra cameras would have been nice, but not worth the extra $5-7K it would have cost. I'll wind up getting leather seats done by Katzen down the road, so that isn't an issue either, plus they'll be bespoke and not the weird color combos Ford has. 

[akirby]

Wheels on the bus go round and round, round and round, round and round……….

[Harley Lover]

On 4/18/2023 at 12:26 PM, Rick73 said:

People claim we will eliminate coal soon (let’s hope that’s correct)

 

Meanwhile in China: 

Quote

50 GW of coal power capacity started construction in China in 2022, a more than 50% increase from 2021. Many of these projects had their permits fast-tracked and moved to construction in a matter of months. A total of 106 GW of new coal power projects were permitted, the equivalent of two large coal power plants per week.

 

TWO LARGE COAL POWER PLANTS PER WEEK.

 

https://energyandcleanair.org/publication/china-permits-two-new-coal-power-plants-per-week-in-2022/#:~:text=Of the projects permitted in,from 40 GW in 2021.

Edited April 20, 2023 by Harley Lover

[Chrisgb]

7 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

 

Just using the new Nautilus as an example-I was playing with the configurator and I had one option I picked for it on the base model...and it would have suited me perfectly fine. I went through this with my Bronco-I was looking at an Outer Banks vs the Big Bend I got...getting the 12 inch display and extra cameras would have been nice, but not worth the extra $5-7K it would have cost. I'll wind up getting leather seats done by Katzen down the road, so that isn't an issue either, plus they'll be bespoke and not the weird color combos Ford has. 

I did the same thing when buying my Ranger. I opted for the STX SE package on an XL and added aftermarket heated seats. I didn't want leather,  and I can live without the sunglasses holder the XL doesn't come with. ~ $4-5000 less than an XLT302A or Lariat.  I have a $49 fan powered plug-in ventilated seat cushion from my semi days that I install in the spring. Yes integrated accessories are nicer looking, but there is an aftermarket bulging with in-stock goodies that work as well as OEM without having to buy trims and options you don't want or care about.

[silvrsvt]

18 hours ago, Harley Lover said:

Meanwhile in China: 

 

TWO LARGE COAL POWER PLANTS PER WEEK.

 

https://energyandcleanair.org/publication/china-permits-two-new-coal-power-plants-per-week-in-2022/#:~:text=Of the projects permitted in,from 40 GW in 2021.

 

So because the other guy isn't doing it, that means you shouldn't? If it get to that point, other countries can start embargos etc to cut off trade with China if they don't meet goals. I know its far fetched, but it is an option. 

[Harley Lover]

1 hour ago, silvrsvt said:

So because the other guy isn't doing it, that means you shouldn't? If it get to that point, other countries can start embargos etc to cut off trade with China if they don't meet goals. I know its far fetched, but it is an option. 

 

Where did I say that?

[akirby]

It does reduce the impact of changes made elsewhere and that should be taken into account when determining how aggressively to pursue changes.