OP
@toshi avatar
UTC

Addicted
2008 Kawasaki Versys
Joined: UTC
Posts: 615
Location: Plainview, LI
 
Addicted
@toshi avatar
2008 Kawasaki Versys
Joined: UTC
Posts: 615
Location: Plainview, LI
UTC quote
I. A warning to readers

Advance warning: click "back" or "next" if you're not at all interested in electric vehicles or their energy use. This is a long, wonkish post, let the audience (as it were) be warned. It's not scooter related, but is peripherally related in that it involves low-energy-use ways to get around.

II. Introduction, Importance, and Scope

Still here? This post regards the charmingly named "Well-to-Wheels Analysis of Energy Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles", just released in June 2010 by the Argonne National Laboratory. It's essentially an updated, more comprehensive version of the 2000 MIT Energy Lab study that I cited in my April 2009 post, "Do electric cars make environmental sense?"

What does this paper actually examine? From its executive summary (emphasis mine):
Quote:
"PHEVs have been touted for their potential to reduce the U.S. transportation sector's dependence on petroleum and cut greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions ... . A well-to-wheels (WTW) analysis - which examines energy use and emissions from primary energy source through vehicle operation - can help researchers better understand the impact of the upstream mix of electricity generation technologies for PHEV recharging, as well as the powertrain technology and fuel sources for PHEVs. ...

"Argonne employed detailed dispatch models to simulate the electric power systems in four major regions of the United States: ... . Argonne also evaluated the U.S. average generation mix and renewable generation of electricity for PHEV and BEV recharging scenarios to show the effects of these generation mixes on PHEV WTW results.

"The primary conclusion is that electrification of transportation significantly reduces petroleum energy use, but GHG emissions strongly depend on the electricity generation mix for battery recharging."
III. Plug-to-Wheels Analysis

Now that we have established "why," onto "what," the data.

External inline image provided by member with no explanatory text


What does this graph mean? I first direct your eye towards the grey circle just about the 4000 mark on the y-axis: that's the energy consumption per mile of a baseline future gasoline engine automobile. Now take a gander at the blue circle at the bottom right of the graph marked "EV": that's the energy consumption per mile of a pure battery electric vehicle (aka BEV; imagine an evolved Nissan Leaf with a 150 mile range and you wouldn't be far off). Note that the energy consumption of the BEV is well under half of that of the conventional gasoline vehicle. Shift your eye to the magenta circle in the 40-mile range column and you can see that the efficiency of the Volt-like vehicle in its initial 40 miles of range is almost indistinguishable from that of the BEV, not terribly surprising. Another interesting data point on this graph is of the magenta square at the 40 mile-range mark on the x-axis, which corresponds to the efficiency of the Volt-like vehicle in charge-sustaining mode, that is, the mode that you'd run in after driving 40 miles. This point shows that the Volt-like vehicle after its initial 40 miles of range is about 15% better than that of a conventional gasoline vehicle. Also note, however, that the magenta square at 40 miles of all electric range is higher than the magenta square at 0 miles: in other words, a non-plug in gasoline electric hybrid like the Prius will be more efficient than a Volt after the 40 mile point.

We're not nearly done yet, even though these findings are interesting, because these relate vehicle miles to energy, which in turn is not equivalent to greenhouse gas emissions due to the sundry ways of generating that same energy in the first place. That is, this is a "power plug to the vehicle's wheels" analysis, whereas the more important question is of "well-to-wheels" energy use and carbon dioxide emissions. After all, why would we want to switch to BEVs if total CO2 production increased as a result?

IV. Energy Generation Variation by Region

In order to conduct a well-to-wheels analysis one must model or make assumptions about how the energy gets from the proverbial well to the power plug. One of the conclusions that I came to in my earlier post, and that this study comes to currently, is that it matters greatly where one lives, as the regional mix of power generation will have profound effects on the total system energy use and CO2 production. It also matters when the vehicles are charged, not just where, as the additional power generation capacity that would be brought on-line during the daytime is much dirtier than the power generation mix at nighttime, when loads are low and excess capacity is rife.

The study examines four regional areas in detail (WECC which encompasses California and the Pac NW/New England/NY/Illinois), looking at the mix (coal/natural gas/nucs/wind/nuclear/etc.) of power generation under a variety of vehicle charging scenarios. Suffice it to say that the increased demand of charging EVs will be met by various means in different regions, and that the mix of power differs by charging time.

What are these "various means" of generating the extra power? Here the answer is a bit complicated. For those following along in the text the data are in Table 6.1. My very shallow summary of this table is that if BEVs and PHEVs are charged at night then the extra power will be generated largely by coal in Illinois; mainly by clean natural gas with some input from coal in the WECC/Western states region; and almost entirely by clean and not so clean natural gas both in the Northeast and in NY state.

What does this mean in terms of well-to-wheels energy usage and greenhouse gas emissions, you ask? Read on for the conclusion of this riveting tale.

V. Well-To-Wheels Energy Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions

To me, the first really surprising conclusions of this paper are from this following figure, excerpted from Figure 6.6:

External inline image provided by member with no explanatory text


The important lines to note are the one at top for the conventional/non-hybrid gasoline vehicle, the red dotted line for the gasoline hybrid-electric vehicle (e.g., Toyota Prius), and the various columns for GHG emissions of a Chevy Volt-type PHEV 40 used in charge-depleting mode (ie, in the first 40 miles of range). What can we conclude from this figure?

First off, if you're in coal-heavy Illinois you shouldn't drive a Chevy Volt, as your well-to-wheels GHG emissions will be almost that of a conventional gasoline car, and quite a bit above the non-plugin hybrid-electric gasoline car (say, Toyota Prius). In other states the Prius and the Volt-in-its-first-40-miles-of-range are essentially a wash except in California, where the Volt "wins" because California's electric power is cleaner than that found elsewhere.

However, the story doesn't end here, as real-world usage of the Volt won't just be in its first 40 miles of charge-depleting range. In combined use that is both charge-depleting (first 40 miles) and charge-sustaining (after 40 miles) usage one can see that PHEVs don't really offer any meaningful reduction in well-to-wheels GHG emissions when compared to a non-plugin Toyota Prius even when using the squeaky-clean California power mix:

External inline image provided by member with no explanatory text

How to interpret the above: the leftmost magenta square is a 0-EV-only-mile range gasoline-electric hybrid: a Prius, essentially. The rightmost magenta square is a PHEV 40: a Chevy Volt, more or less. The rightmost grey square with the dotted red circle around it is a pure BEV, a 150-mile range Nissan Leaf, if you will. Note that the slope of the magenta line across the various PHEV ranges is basically null: in other words in combined use the Volt has only a negligible reduction in well-to-wheels GHG emissions when compared to a Prius. Also note that the well-to-wheels GHG emissions of a pure BEV like the Leaf-on-steroids is about half that of either the Volt or the Prius.

VI. Conclusions

I'd say the results of this study are a pretty clear "win" for BEVs, and a pretty clear failure for the case of PHEVs. In the best case of California clean power generation and charge-depleting use in the first 40 miles of its range the 2015-spec Volt is as clean as a BEV in terms of well-to-wheels GHG emissions. In every other case (outside 40 miles of range, power less clean than that of California) the 2015-spec Prius at least matches the Volt and in some cases even beats it outright.

Given my interpretation I find it curious that the authors instead conclude that PHEVs can lead to reduced GHG emissions and energy usage... when compared to conventional gasoline vehicles. I find this conclusion of theirs disingenuous, as when comparing (rightly, in my opinion) to non-plugin gasoline electric hybrids like the Toyota Prius then one sees that the environmental case for PHEVs basically falls flat on its face. I can only speculate why the authors didn't emphasize this point more.
@masala avatar
UTC

Veni, Vidi, Posti
946
Joined: UTC
Posts: 6165
Location: Acworth, GA
 
Veni, Vidi, Posti
@masala avatar
946
Joined: UTC
Posts: 6165
Location: Acworth, GA
UTC quote
Epic post... I mostly read the bolded and colored "high points," but I did give a more thorough glance to other parts. In short, I'm impressed with the depth at which academia is looking at electric vehicles. I've long been a believer that electricity is a way to go in the future, but the whole notion of "well-to-wheels" is one that I hadn't fully considered in such detail. This study certainly makes doing so much easier.

Thank you for posting!
OP
@toshi avatar
UTC

Addicted
2008 Kawasaki Versys
Joined: UTC
Posts: 615
Location: Plainview, LI
 
Addicted
@toshi avatar
2008 Kawasaki Versys
Joined: UTC
Posts: 615
Location: Plainview, LI
UTC quote
Masala wrote:
Epic post... I mostly read the bolded and colored "high points," but I did give a more thorough glance to other parts. In short, I'm impressed with the depth at which academia is looking at electric vehicles. I've long been a believer that electricity is a way to go in the future, but the whole notion of "well-to-wheels" is one that I hadn't fully considered in such detail. This study certainly makes doing so much easier.

Thank you for posting!
Woohoo, at least one person actually read it! (or the bolded parts 8) )

For the record, all the text apart from the explicit quoted sections is interpretation by the hypomanic brain of yours truly. The actual study is, uh, "very dense" and has all sorts of models and figures galore. The ambitious can read it here:

http://www.ipd.anl.gov/anlpubs/2010/06/67242.pdf <-- linked all stealth-like from the original post
@sallad avatar
UTC

Molto Verboso
GTS
Joined: UTC
Posts: 1231
Location: Brooklyn, NY
 
Molto Verboso
@sallad avatar
GTS
Joined: UTC
Posts: 1231
Location: Brooklyn, NY
UTC quote
I've had a few glasses of wine so forgive me if I missed it (I did my best to read it) but I have a question...

... this is based on current numbers and theoretical projections correct?

I ask because at this point, yes electric is less impactful than fossil fuel. However, if electric vehicles were to replace combustion vehicles 1:1 wouldn't the minor negatives of EV now be exacerbated due to volume?

It says BEVs consume less than 1/2 the energy of traditional vehicles. But there are exponentially fewer BEVs than traditional vehicles. Wouldn't their energy consume skyrocket if they had the same market share as traditional vehicles?

If there are 1,000 EVs on the road now and they are "green" isn't a part of their "greenness" the fact that there are few of them thereby requiring few battery plants, electric plants, etc.

I just have a hard time believing a full switch to an alternative fuel will yield the results the limited runs of such fuels yield now.

I suppose it's probably because I'm a believer in moderation and options. Part of the problem with gasoline is we use to much of it and there are no options. I worry that moving purely to electric will yield similar results, a dependence on a fuel source that is't as entirely benign as we might have thought.


Props, Toshi, on a pretty impressive post.
@miguel avatar
UTC

Veni, Vidi, Posti
2009 GTV250 (Gone), 2003 Inder trailer (also gone), 2001 BMW R1100RT
Joined: UTC
Posts: 5707
Location: Santa Cruz California
 
Veni, Vidi, Posti
@miguel avatar
2009 GTV250 (Gone), 2003 Inder trailer (also gone), 2001 BMW R1100RT
Joined: UTC
Posts: 5707
Location: Santa Cruz California
UTC quote
Toshi. Thx for the post. I'm too tired to read it tonite in detail. I'll get to it tmw. It's a subject that has always fascinated me. My gas sports car sits in the garage weeks at a time and requires no fuel but if it were electric, the power company has to have the generating capacity and be burning fuel to charge it whether I use it or not. Hows that get factored into rhe equation? More tmw.
Best
Miguel
UTC

Hooked
1979 P125X with 200 LML motor
Joined: UTC
Posts: 139
Location: Home of rock-n-roll
 
Hooked
1979 P125X with 200 LML motor
Joined: UTC
Posts: 139
Location: Home of rock-n-roll
UTC quote
Depends on how fast you accelerate to get to where you're going. Give me a range of best case vs. worst case scenarios. A light foot vs. flooring it. Razz emoticon

I see the focus is on the limits of the Volt's 40 mile electric charge range. Why not show the extended range of say 200 miles? Nobody got that far?

I don't know...I'm not convinced.
OP
@toshi avatar
UTC

Addicted
2008 Kawasaki Versys
Joined: UTC
Posts: 615
Location: Plainview, LI
 
Addicted
@toshi avatar
2008 Kawasaki Versys
Joined: UTC
Posts: 615
Location: Plainview, LI
UTC quote
sallad wrote:
I've had a few glasses of wine so forgive me if I missed it (I did my best to read it) but I have a question...

... this is based on current numbers and theoretical projections correct?

I ask because at this point, yes electric is less impactful than fossil fuel. However, if electric vehicles were to replace combustion vehicles 1:1 wouldn't the minor negatives of EV now be exacerbated due to volume?

It says BEVs consume less than 1/2 the energy of traditional vehicles. But there are exponentially fewer BEVs than traditional vehicles. Wouldn't their energy consume skyrocket if they had the same market share as traditional vehicles?

If there are 1,000 EVs on the road now and they are "green" isn't a part of their "greenness" the fact that there are few of them thereby requiring few battery plants, electric plants, etc.
Assuming we as society have a fairly constant number of vehicle-miles (or passenger-miles assuming constant occupancy in each vehicle) to be traveled, then one would assume that extra miles driven by new BEVs would be offset by the same number of miles not driven by gasoline powered cars. Given that the BEV is roughly twice as efficient then there will be less energy used. Win all around.

Whether the power grid could keep up is a theoretical concern, and this paper took a good, hard look at the actual setup of the generation and distribution network in four regions (NY, New England, WECC/Cali/Western, Illinois) and figured out how the extra demand would be met.
sallad wrote:
I just have a hard time believing a full switch to an alternative fuel will yield the results the limited runs of such fuels yield now.

I suppose it's probably because I'm a believer in moderation and options. Part of the problem with gasoline is we use to much of it and there are no options. I worry that moving purely to electric will yield similar results, a dependence on a fuel source that is't as entirely benign as we might have thought.

Props, Toshi, on a pretty impressive post.
I agree that moderation is ultimately the best solution. Even if BEVs are twice as efficient as regular cars they are no cure for our society's excesses in general.

They are a step in the right direction, however, with the added bonus that they can let motivated people (like me) eventually divorce themselves from the electric grid. I'd love to have a windmill, a water wheel, an array of photovoltaic panels and a means of storing all that energy (pumping water up a hill to a tank? big battery?). That way when the zombies come (or when Israel nukes Iran and the price of oil skyrockets) then I will be more or less immune.
OP
@toshi avatar
UTC

Addicted
2008 Kawasaki Versys
Joined: UTC
Posts: 615
Location: Plainview, LI
 
Addicted
@toshi avatar
2008 Kawasaki Versys
Joined: UTC
Posts: 615
Location: Plainview, LI
UTC quote
Miguel wrote:
Toshi. Thx for the post. I'm too tired to read it tonite in detail. I'll get to it tmw. It's a subject that has always fascinated me. My gas sports car sits in the garage weeks at a time and requires no fuel but if it were electric, the power company has to have the generating capacity and be burning fuel to charge it whether I use it or not. Hows that get factored into rhe equation? More tmw.
Best
Miguel
Good point, Miguel. On the other hand, the gas company needs to plan their exploration, drilling, transportation, refining, further transportation, and distribution needs many years in advance, too. Although gasoline itself is portable the means of getting it from the well to your tank is anything but.

With regard to the actual energy generation and distribution that would need to be planned for with BEVs and PHEVs, that's what this paper is about. The short answer is that the extra capacity that would be required would be generated by dirty means in some areas (Illinois in this paper) and by clean means in others (California in this paper).

If you're curious in general about how power is generated in your neck of the woods then NPR has a nice interactive tool. For instance, West Virginia has almost entirely coal fired electric plants so driving a BEV or PHEV in that region would probably not be good for the environment:

http://www.npr.org/news/graphics/2009/apr/electric-grid/

External inline image provided by member with no explanatory text
OP
@toshi avatar
UTC

Addicted
2008 Kawasaki Versys
Joined: UTC
Posts: 615
Location: Plainview, LI
 
Addicted
@toshi avatar
2008 Kawasaki Versys
Joined: UTC
Posts: 615
Location: Plainview, LI
UTC quote
artsiistra wrote:
I see the focus is on the limits of the Volt's 40 mile electric charge range. Why not show the extended range of say 200 miles? Nobody got that far?

I don't know...I'm not convinced.
Take another look, as the data is there:

External inline image provided by member with no explanatory text

The squares are for "charge sustaining" mode, aka the "extended range." Note, as I did in the original post, that the gasoline PHEV 40 (magenta square, 40 column on x-axis) has higher energy consumption per mile than the non-plugin hybrid (where the magenta square intersects with the y-axis). In other words, the Prius wins once the Volt is out of its 40 mile range.
@ronin avatar
UTC

Addicted
Vespa Rally 180 BMW R1150R Suzuki Burgman 400
Joined: UTC
Posts: 871
Location: Royal Oak, Michigan, USA
 
Addicted
@ronin avatar
Vespa Rally 180 BMW R1150R Suzuki Burgman 400
Joined: UTC
Posts: 871
Location: Royal Oak, Michigan, USA
UTC quote
Thanks for the excellent post - Did you see this on the Detroit Bureau?

http://www.thedetroitbureau.com/2010/08/new-study-finds-diesel-gas-still-have-leg-up-on-hybrids/

It's some interesting stuff, especially since it specifically mentions the Transit Connect, a relatively small-engined utility van that more and more scooter aficionados seem to be choosing as a scooter-transport-friendly vehicle.
@benito avatar
UTC

Moderator
2010 Dragon Red GTS 300 Super, 2018 Grigio Titanio Piaggio Liberty S 150
Joined: UTC
Posts: 16296
Location: Toronto, Canada, Fort Lauderdale, Florida
 
Moderator
@benito avatar
2010 Dragon Red GTS 300 Super, 2018 Grigio Titanio Piaggio Liberty S 150
Joined: UTC
Posts: 16296
Location: Toronto, Canada, Fort Lauderdale, Florida
UTC quote
Interesting post!
@jlb avatar
UTC

Molto Verboso
2007 Vespa GTS 250ie
Joined: UTC
Posts: 1624
Location: Titusville Florida
 
Molto Verboso
@jlb avatar
2007 Vespa GTS 250ie
Joined: UTC
Posts: 1624
Location: Titusville Florida
UTC quote
Nice factual post.
@dooglas avatar
UTC

Veni, Vidi, Posti
GTS 300ABS, Buddy 125, Buddy Kick 125
Joined: UTC
Posts: 13509
Location: Oregon City, OR
 
Veni, Vidi, Posti
@dooglas avatar
GTS 300ABS, Buddy 125, Buddy Kick 125
Joined: UTC
Posts: 13509
Location: Oregon City, OR
UTC quote
sallad wrote:
It says BEVs consume less than 1/2 the energy of traditional vehicles. But there are exponentially fewer BEVs than traditional vehicles. Wouldn't their energy consume skyrocket if they had the same market share as traditional vehicles?
I believe the analysis looks at per vehicle differences rather than differences for the presumed fleet size of each.
Miguel wrote:
My gas sports car sits in the garage weeks at a time and requires no fuel but if it were electric, the power company has to have the generating capacity and be burning fuel to charge it whether I use it or not. Hows that get factored into rhe equation?
This issue is really no different than how power companies meet load now. They don't know whether you have an espresso machine, a space heater or an electric grill - or how often you use them. They know what their average and peak loads are under a variety of conditions. They plan supply accordingly. Since they serve hundreds of thousands or millions of customers, their calculations generally average out. In other words, there is no unused generating capacity standing by dedicated to the possibility that everyone in the US would use their toaster at the same time.

Excellent and thought provoking article toshi. Thanks for the interpretations.
OP
@toshi avatar
UTC

Addicted
2008 Kawasaki Versys
Joined: UTC
Posts: 615
Location: Plainview, LI
 
Addicted
@toshi avatar
2008 Kawasaki Versys
Joined: UTC
Posts: 615
Location: Plainview, LI
UTC quote
Ronin wrote:
Thanks for the excellent post - Did you see this on the Detroit Bureau?

http://www.thedetroitbureau.com/2010/08/new-study-finds-diesel-gas-still-have-leg-up-on-hybrids/

It's some interesting stuff, especially since it specifically mentions the Transit Connect, a relatively small-engined utility van that more and more scooter aficionados seem to be choosing as a scooter-transport-friendly vehicle.
I did see that, and I noted that it's by CNW. I think that firm has an axe to grind/has an agenda to push, as its prior "dust to dust" articles were crap, to put it bluntly.

How so? Well, to come up with their prior conclusion that a Hummer H2 was more efficient over its lifecycle than a Prius they assumed a 100,000 mile lifespan for the Prius and a 300,000 (!) mile lifespan for the Hummer. Without such unwarranted jiggering of the figures they wouldn't have made the headlines, and most news places that regurgitated their nonsense had no idea of the underlying assumptions behind their "study."

I wrote about the life cycle energy concerns (including manufacturing and eventual disposal) in a prior post: http://tinyurl.com/EVemissions . The meat of that post was a 2000 MIT Energy Lab paper, and their graph ( http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/2647/picture1gk6.png , not inlined here since it's huge) quite thoroughly dispels the FUD that CNW seeks to disseminate.
@sallad avatar
UTC

Molto Verboso
GTS
Joined: UTC
Posts: 1231
Location: Brooklyn, NY
 
Molto Verboso
@sallad avatar
GTS
Joined: UTC
Posts: 1231
Location: Brooklyn, NY
UTC quote
So a move to EVs would mean a transition from gas stations to charging stations. When you want to go beyond the vehicle range you'll need to re-charge. How long will a re-charge take? I think for EVs to be realistically viable they'll need to be able to recharge on a timeline similar to a traditional vehicle.

If I'm driving the 400 miles to visit my in-laws in Maine I stop once or twice to gas the car up It takes no more than 10 minutes each time. If I had to stop for more than 30 minutes to re-charge my EV that would be a deal breaker for me (not to mention I like to do the 400 miles in 1 day, at 70+mph. Can my EV do that?)

Make the re-charging as easy as re-fueling and then I think they have a real shot at acceptance.

Also, as the grid will need to be increased to accommodate the new electric pull (ie "charging stations") how will the electricity be produced? Can non-fossil fuel sources create enough power to keep the expanded electric grid online?
OP
@toshi avatar
UTC

Addicted
2008 Kawasaki Versys
Joined: UTC
Posts: 615
Location: Plainview, LI
 
Addicted
@toshi avatar
2008 Kawasaki Versys
Joined: UTC
Posts: 615
Location: Plainview, LI
UTC quote
sallad wrote:
So a move to EVs would mean a transition from gas stations to charging stations. When you want to go beyond the vehicle range you'll need to re-charge. How long will a re-charge take? I think for EVs to be realistically viable they'll need to be able to recharge on a timeline similar to a traditional vehicle.

If I'm driving the 400 miles to visit my in-laws in Maine I stop once or twice to gas the car up It takes no more than 10 minutes each time. If I had to stop for more than 30 minutes to re-charge my EV that would be a deal breaker for me (not to mention I like to do the 400 miles in 1 day, at 70+mph. Can my EV do that?)

Make the re-charging as easy as re-fueling and then I think they have a real shot at acceptance.
Project Better Place is all about solving this problem. For my own uses I think owning an EV to use for day to day commuting and errands and having a Zipcar membership with which to have access to gas cars/trucks for longer trips not suitable for BEVs makes the most sense.
sallad wrote:
Also, as the grid will need to be increased to accommodate the new electric pull (ie "charging stations") how will the electricity be produced? Can non-fossil fuel sources create enough power to keep the expanded electric grid online?
This is a very valid concern, and was the topic of a whole section in the paper, section 5. The relevant chart for the NY area showing how additional load on the grid from unrestricted charging (charging right after work), delayed (3h after coming home) and smart charging (at night at off-peak hours) would be met is on page 89, I believe.

In Illinois a lot of this extra demand would be met by coal, and as a result electric or PHEVs might be worse for the environment than, say, Priuses. In New York the power is mostly from clean and unclean/older tech natural gas, which would be a bit cleaner than a Prius but not by a ton. In California the power would be generated mostly by clean natural gas, and running a BEV or PHEV there would be quite good.

http://www.ipd.anl.gov/anlpubs/2010/06/67242.pdf
@ronin avatar
UTC

Addicted
Vespa Rally 180 BMW R1150R Suzuki Burgman 400
Joined: UTC
Posts: 871
Location: Royal Oak, Michigan, USA
 
Addicted
@ronin avatar
Vespa Rally 180 BMW R1150R Suzuki Burgman 400
Joined: UTC
Posts: 871
Location: Royal Oak, Michigan, USA
UTC quote
Toshi wrote:
Ronin wrote:
Thanks for the excellent post - Did you see this on the Detroit Bureau?

http://www.thedetroitbureau.com/2010/08/new-study-finds-diesel-gas-still-have-leg-up-on-hybrids/

It's some interesting stuff, especially since it specifically mentions the Transit Connect, a relatively small-engined utility van that more and more scooter aficionados seem to be choosing as a scooter-transport-friendly vehicle.
I did see that, and I noted that it's by CNW. I think that firm has an axe to grind/has an agenda to push, as its prior "dust to dust" articles were crap, to put it bluntly.

How so? Well, to come up with their prior conclusion that a Hummer H2 was more efficient over its lifecycle than a Prius they assumed a 100,000 mile lifespan for the Prius and a 300,000 (!) mile lifespan for the Hummer. Without such unwarranted jiggering of the figures they wouldn't have made the headlines, and most news places that regurgitated their nonsense had no idea of the underlying assumptions behind their "study."

I wrote about the life cycle energy concerns (including manufacturing and eventual disposal) in a prior post: http://tinyurl.com/EVemissions . The meat of that post was a 2000 MIT Energy Lab paper, and their graph ( http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/2647/picture1gk6.png , not inlined here since it's huge) quite thoroughly dispels the FUD that CNW seeks to disseminate.
Well, I saw that earlier article and thought that it was a bit of a stretch. But then again, I try not to pre-judge new work that by all appearances, looks pretty interesting.

Modern Vespa is the premier site for modern Vespa and Piaggio scooters. Vespa GTS300, GTS250, GTV, GT200, LX150, LXS, ET4, ET2, MP3, Fuoco, Elettrica and more.

Buy Me A Coffee
 

Shop on Amazon with Modern Vespa

Modern Vespa is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com


All Content Copyright 2005-2025 by Modern Vespa.
All Rights Reserved.


[ Time: 0.0295s ][ Queries: 3 (0.0090s) ][ live ][ 328 ][ ThingOne ]