EPA Fraud: Chevy Volt, Nissan Leaf Actually Get Only 23, 25 MPG

Pajamas Media ^ | November 30, 2010 | Chris J Kobus

[jazusamo]

The MPG figure must be calculated where the energy is produced. Doesn't matter if that happens in the car's engine ... or in the coal plant, as with the Leaf and Volt.

You may have heard the mileage rating for the Nissan Leaf is 99 MPG (miles per gallon equivalent). Here’s what the sticker looks like (I highlighted the relevant portions that I will expand upon):

As Auto Blog says of the rating: “It looks good.” Of course it looks good. But there’s a whole lot more to the story. Note that the MPG rating is MPG equivalent. The MSM has been dropping the “equivalent,” making it seem to consumers that the vehicle is far more efficient than it truly is. Which is the intent, of course.

The ratings for the Chevy Volt have just been released as well. From the Detroit Free Press:

Chevy Volt to hit 93 m.p.g. in electric-only mode; battery-only Nissan Leaf to reach 99 m.p.g.

There is not a single instance of the word “equivalent” in the entire article. Nor is there any mention of last year’s claim that the Volt gets 230 miles per gallon (that was a different fraudulent number, based on a separate fraudulent scheme).

The current “miles per gallon equivalent” is a fraud perpetrated to hide the true environmental cost of these cars. One gallon of gas does have about 33.5 kilowatt-hours of chemical potential (depending on blend, additives, etc). And about that much energy is needed to get the Leaf to go 99 miles, and the Volt to go 93. But here’s where the fraud is perpetrated: the electricity for those vehicles is being generated by mostly coal power plants that are only about 33% efficient (minus transmission losses and losses from charging). Coal plants are off-site power generators (whereas car engines are on-board) and are totally ignored in the EPA rating.

Let me illustrate by example how this scheme works, and why it’s such a fraud.

Let’s say you took your gas-guzzling engine out of your car and hooked it up to a generator in your garage. The engine has a fuel efficiency of 15 MPG. That’s roughly 25% efficient (a 300 HP engine burns about 1000 HP of gas). You run the engine to generate electricity (let’s assume, just for kicks, that the generator hooked up to your car engine is 100% efficient) to charge your Nissan Leaf or Chevy Volt. Guess what the mileage of that Leaf is? The EPA says you will still get 99 MPG overall. But you actually used four gallons, not one, to get that far, thanks to the charging engine’s 25% efficiency.

The real efficiency of the Leaf is dependent on the efficiency of the coal power plant: the Leaf gets 25 MPG, not 99. The Chevy Volt gets 23 MPG, not 93.

The EPA is purposely comparing apples to oranges, conveniently hiding the fact that you are simply displacing gasoline usage with coal. The fact that you don’t have to directly throw coal into your car doesn’t mean you aren’t using any. Indeed, the overall efficiency of electric vehicles charged on coal is no better than a car with a spark ignition engine.

And far short of the efficiencies achieved with diesel.

Just in case anyone out there is opining that we should therefore go with “renewable sources” (wind, solar etc.), that will make the available energy problem even worse.

Nature will always get its pound of flesh, and the EPA’s intentional misleading of consumers doesn’t change the fact that we will be no less dependent on fossil fuel at all — and may be more so in this case. As it is, without far more nuclear power plants, the combination of using coal with lithium — the mining of which is one of the dirtiest operations known to man — may well be environmentally worse than just burning gasoline, and is definitely worse than burning diesel.

The Obama administration should hand out a blue pill with each purchase of the Chevy Volt, so you can smugly drive around in ignorant bliss.

Chris Kobus is an Associate Professor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at Oakland University where he has worked since receiving his Ph.D. in 1998. He is the Director of the Clean Energy Research Center (CERC), and his research focus is in the broad field of energy transport and conversion.

[CALawyer]

As much as I would love to see these weenie mobiles relegated to obscurity, especially when Government Motors is involved, this is a pretty silly argument to make.

To calculate the “true” MPG of our gas guzzlers, should we now start factoring in how much energy was expended to locate the oil, to then drill the oil, to then ship the oil to refineries, to then refine the oil into gasoline, to then truck the gasoline to our gas station....

The associated costs are going to be spread out over a huge volume of gasoline users, but the same can probably be said for users of electricity.

[Westbrook]

> Many people seem to drive them to make a statement.

That is the biggest reason I hate those things.

I hate the statement their owners are trying to make.

Every greenie weenie around here that can afford them has at least one of those pieces of junk.

By my reckoning, they are debris with or without snow. Good to know that the snow will sideline them, though.

[tacticalogic]

As much as I would love to see these weenie mobiles relegated to obscurity, especially when Government Motors is involved, this is a pretty silly argument to make.

To calculate the “true” MPG of our gas guzzlers, should we now start factoring in how much energy was expended to locate the oil, to then drill the oil, to then ship the oil to refineries, to then refine the oil into gasoline, to then truck the gasoline to our gas station....

He's not figuring in the energy required to mine and transport the coal, or the cost of installing and maintaining the power grid. He's just calculating how much fuel had to be burned to power the car.

[Yet_Again]

In the end, while I like diesels, the bottom line in the electric vs. diesel argument is this:

Coal is bought from places in America that vote for conservatives. Oil comes from places in the middle east that want to kill us.

[Lmo56]

SHAZAAM !!!

[jazusamo]

There’s a lot to be said for comfort and having a vehicle that will carry a load when you need to. The roller skates they’re putting out now don’t cut it and I wouldn’t drive one just from the safety standpoint.

[ExTxMarine]

As much as I would love to see these weenie mobiles relegated to obscurity, especially when Government Motors is involved, this is a pretty silly argument to make.
The associated costs are going to be spread out over a huge volume of gasoline users, but the same can probably be said for users of electricity.
I guess I don't agree with your premise, because the EPA and all these other enviro-nuts all claim how much better for the environment these are and that they cost less to operate, etc... And ALL of that is BS!

MPG on a sticker tells you about how much it will cost to operate that vehicle when calculated with YOUR daily/weekly/annual commute. That is how most people use the MPG ratings. And the ratings as listed on that sticker are simply BS! Because what they DO NOT tell you is that your home electric bill is going to double or triple or even quadruple!

If we calculate the cost of all the other items into my MPG on my Excursion, it will not change the amount it costs me to operate that vehicle because I know what I get (and it is roughly what the original sticker stated). But that is NOT going to be the case with these stupid cars and I think the American consumer should know the truth! Hell, I thought all the Demon-crats wanted all the truth in marketing and putting the calorie count on the FRONT so the consumer could be warned, etc... These labels are no longer useful except as a BS advertisement for the manufacturers!

[ExTxMarine]

He's not figuring in the energy required to mine and transport the coal, or the cost of installing and maintaining the power grid. He's just calculating how much fuel had to be burned to power the car.
That's part of the argument I was trying to make - but you said it so much more efficiently. LOL!

And the cost to charge, is just another made-up number! Complete BS out of thin air, because electricity rates change, they are different from region to region, we do not know how long before it takes longer or more electricity to charge these same batteries, etc... They are simply allowing these manufacturers to put whatever they want on these stickers to sell them - ALL BS!

[Bean Counter]

And don’t forget about 6600 Watts/hour to charge it; installation of the charger; etc, etc, &c, &c...

“Did you remember to carry da bum? Good!”

....

[paterfamilias]

I’m with you.

Our “new car” is a 2002 VW Golf TDI - we just love diesels! It has 145,000 miles on it.

Oh yeah, I also have a a vintage sports car that get 18 MPG, but it goes fast.

[Ditto]

If I’m reading this correctly, the electric coal plant is 33% efficient

Older (1950s-60s vintage units)are that low. The 1970s and 80s supercritical boilers were in the 35-40% range and now ultra supercritical coal-fired boilers are at 45%+ efficient.

Materials technologies of the last 30-40 years have given boiler manufactures a lot more margin on running at much higher temperatures and steam pressures which improves efficiency.

[CharlesWayneCT]

But 33kw of coal is a lot cheaper than 33kw of gasoline. So this only matters if you really cared how much gasoline you were burning, rather than how much money it was going to cost you to drive your car.

My July electric bill was $114.87 for 1059 KWH. That’s 10.84 cents per KWH. But that includes fixed costs; my variable cost for another KWH is actually 9 cents.

So the 100 miles in the leaf, which uses 34kwh, will cost me 34*9= $3.06. Gas is currently $2.85/gallon here in my home town, so my “gasoline PRICE equivalent is 1.07 gallons, which gives me a MPG PRICE equivalent of 93 mpg.

That takes into account ALL the costs of delivering my electricity to me, since those costs are built into the price I pay for the electricity.

That’s a pretty good deal. My Prius is about 45 mpg, so I’d cut my costs in half by switching to a Leaf. If you currently get 30mpg in a standard car, you’d cut your costs by 2/3rds.

Note that the amount you saved is proportional to what you currently spend. So the 1/2 I save isn’t 33% better than the 2/3rds you’d save — since my current costs are 33% lower than the person getting 30mpg.

TO determine savings, you need to invert everything, and count miles driven.

If you drive 10,000 miles a year, assuming gas at $2.85 and electricity at the 9cents/kwh, you get these savings based on your current MPG (the leaf would cost 10,000/100*34*0.09 = $306.

10mpg (2850) = $2540 (89%)
20mpg (1425) = $1118 (78%)
30mpg (950) = $643 (68%)
45mpg (633) = $326 (52%)
60mpg (475) = $168 (35%)

Note how the “percent” savings looks great, but since your original costs go down as you increase your mileage, the absolute savings is much less. Replacing a 10mpg car with a leaf, assuming they were equivalent for you, would be a great investment, because you’d pay off the difference in a few years of savings.

But you’d NEVER save enough to make it worthwhile to trade in a 45mpg car.

Note this interesting point:

10mpg -> 20mpg = $1425 savings.
45mpg -> 90mpg = $326 savings.

Even though the two upgrades both double your gas mileage, it’s worth a LOT more to double the gas mileage of a low-mpg car than a high mpg car.

This is why comparing MPG numbers is really the WRONG way to figure out costs, and also why the car companies love it. You think you are getting a great deal going from 30mpg to 35mpg, and it’s meaningless.

Instead, we should rate cars in gallons per 100 miles:
10mpg = 10
20mpg = 5
45mpg = 2.2
50mpg = 2
90mpg = 1.1

See, now it is clear that the 10->20mpg upgrade is worth a lot more savings (5) than the 45->90mpg upgrade (1.1).

[CharlesWayneCT]

A Prius is shown to get better gas mileage if a girl drives.

At least that’s what the scientific study I did comparing my MPG with my wife’s MPG shows.

[CharlesWayneCT]

That’s why we should compare cost of energy, rather than amount of energy. Nobody cares how many kilowatts of power you used; what we care about is how much it costs to go a mile.

The Leaf is a lot less expensive per mile than a gasoline-powered car, unless your electricity is really expensive. That’s because electric power generation is a lot more efficient than your car’s conversion of gasoline to motion.

The

[Lx]

I’ve got a V12 and I get around 22-25 on the freeway as I pass piuses.

[ralphetta7]

how do you subtract out the “inefficiencies” of standard gas powered cars? why not just use cost per mile and ROI?

but I bet drilling a hole in he ground is cheaper than running a natural gas powered power station(?)

[Cold Heart]

The Volt is a coal burner.
Should list fuel consumption of Volt as lbs of coal per mile.

[SeeSac]

but I bet drilling a hole in he ground is cheaper than running a natural gas powered power station(?)

You don't 'just drill a hole in the ground'.

[SeeSac]

The Volt is a nuclear burner.
Should list fuel consumption of Volt as grams of uranium per mile.