Chevy Volt drivers average 800 miles between fill-ups.

I KNOW this is a problem with modern diesels. When I'm talking about cold, I mean -20 celcius and below.

Atleast 50% of all cars in norway are diesels. -20 is a normal cold winter day in the capital (which lies in the south.) In the north -40 celcius is not unheard of in any given year. -50 also happens.

While diesels have problems with cold, i believe you are grossly exagurating them. There are ways to overcome them, like Evil pointed out.

Otherwise im sure that the inhabitants of a country with 90 000+ USD GDP per capita per year could have afforded to switch to petrols. Since if the -20 celcius and below thingy would hold, we wouldn't be able to use our cars for very significant periods of the year.

I also believe the car topgear used to reach the north pole was a 3.0 diesel toyota hilux...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So in what way is my calculation bullshit? Yes, I just got the ratio of US to UK deisal prices wrong, however there is a world ouside of the US you know, the calculation is probably still correct for the UK and probably most of europe.
Look, if you say that you pay 3x as much for gas as in the US, then that's what I'm going to use.

Your £15k number is BS, too. It doesn't cost that much to go from ICE to PHEV.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
We need to stop talking about diesel because it doesn't solve anything. Diesel and gasoline will always be used in the same ratio because that's how it's produced from crude. If more people buy diesel cars, then prices will adjust and consumption will change elsewhere to maintain that ratio again.

Keep diesel primarily for trucks and trains. Even though they're cleaner now, they're still dirtier than gas.
 
Look, if you say that you pay 3x as much for gas as in the US, then that's what I'm going to use.
Doesn't matter which multiplier you use, both produce valid numbers i.e. as stated else where in this thread diesels that do 75MPG+ are readily available in the EU.
Your £15k number is BS, too. It doesn't cost that much to go from ICE to PHEV.
As I'm not intending to change my car £19k is the _minimum_ I would have to pay to get a hybrid, that buys me a car well below the spec of my current car. If I was changing my car and I was currently driving a relatively low spec car then the differential is about 6K. Even then the lower spec car has better economy so it still takes 7-10years to cover the cost differential i.e. it is not BS however you try to spin it. Perhaps you should actually work out the numbers rather than calling something BS just because you don't agree with something.
We need to stop talking about diesel because it doesn't solve anything. Diesel and gasoline will always be used in the same ratio because that's how it's produced from crude. If more people buy diesel cars, then prices will adjust and consumption will change elsewhere to maintain that ratio again.
Yes we should talking about them, we should also be talking high efficiency petrol engines that also exist in the EU. The point here is that the decision to go for EV is being based on an invalid starting point, the numbers _don't_ add up if you look at modern efficient engines as tend to be used in the EU.
 
As I'm not intending to change my car
That's the basis of your argument? WTF? So should we stop all production of cars then because you don't want to buy a car? :LOL:

How about you put an iota of thought in your argument? In 2010, only 1M cars were hybrids out of maybe 30M produced in advanced economies, and very few of those are PHEV. Nobody is trying to convince the world to replace the other 800M cars on the road with hybrids right now.

If I was changing my car and I was currently driving a relatively low spec car then the differential is about 6K.
6K is a little different than 15K.

I have worked out the numbers. PHEV absolutely is worth it in Europe. Just think about a company leasing cars for its employees. It can pay €200/mo for the lease and €125/mo for gas or it can pay €300/mo for the lease and maybe €20/mo for electricity (night charging). The latter can probably pay for a €10k higher sticker price (depending on residuals and interest), which should cover the cost of PHEV.

Alternatively, think of a car manufacturer making a deal to sell the PHEV at the same price as the regular car, but asks for 90% of the gas savings back. So if a PHEV's 8kWh battery saves 20 miles of gas per charge (about 2L costing €3), and the battery lasts 3000 charges, then the manufacturer can get back €8k while the driver saves almost €1k. That should be profitable for everyone.

Yes we should talking about them, we should also be talking high efficiency petrol engines that also exist in the EU.
Diesel adoption for cars is a dead end. I wouldn't be surprised if system-wide efficiency went down from increased diesel usage, because it would put downward pressure on gas prices to balance the consumption ratio, creating less impetus for fuel efficiency there.

The point here is that the decision to go for EV is being based on an invalid starting point, the numbers _don't_ add up if you look at modern efficient engines as tend to be used in the EU.
They do add up, and more so in the EU than the US. See above.
 
That's the basis of your argument? WTF? So should we stop all production of cars then because you don't want to buy a car? :LOL:
Eh? How is it the basis of my augment, try reading everything as a whole rather taking things out of context.
How about you put an iota of thought in your argument? In 2010, only 1M cars were hybrids out of maybe 30M produced in advanced economies, and very few of those are PHEV. Nobody is trying to convince the world to replace the other 800M cars on the road with hybrids right now.
These numbers have no bearing on the arguement.
6K is a little different than 15K.
No it isn't, that's 6K on a car with substantially higher fuel economy than I currently drive, get's you to a pretty similar period of time to recover the cost as it's burning 50% less fuel than I am currently.
I have worked out the numbers. PHEV absolutely is worth it in Europe. Just think about a company leasing cars for its employees. It can pay €200/mo for the lease and €125/mo for gas or it can pay €300/mo for the lease and maybe €20/mo for electricity (night charging). The latter can probably pay for a €10k higher sticker price (depending on residuals and interest), which should cover the cost of PHEV.
Electricity costs are more likely to be around 25% of the fuel costs, that's another 11.25 euros, enough to significantly swing the costs in favour of non PHEV. Your also ignoring the fact that many fleet cars are high mileage i.e. they don't do short enough runs for the overnight charge to get them through the following day, so fuel costs will still be far from zero, being very generous lets say fuel costs are 25% of a non PHEV, that's another 31.25 a month on the cost. That's around 20% higher monthly costs for a PHEV in comparison to a conventionally fuelled car.
Alternatively, think of a car manufacturer making a deal to sell the PHEV at the same price as the regular car, but asks for 90% of the gas savings back. So if a PHEV's 8kWh battery saves 20 miles of gas per charge (about 2L costing €3), and the battery lasts 3000 charges, then the manufacturer can get back €8k while the driver saves almost €1k. That should be profitable for everyone.
Interesting suggestion, but the manufacture looses on low mileage users and high mileage users loose as well, so it isn't profitable to everyone.

Diesel adoption for cars is a dead end. I wouldn't be surprised if system-wide efficiency went down from increased diesel usage, because it would put downward pressure on gas prices to balance the consumption ratio, creating less impetus for fuel efficiency there.
As I said, the consideration isn't just diesel, it's all higher efficiency combustion engines that should be considered. Further governments can tax less fuel efficient cars off the road (as they already are in the EU). It most definitely isn't a dead end.
They do add up, and more so in the EU than the US. See above.
They don't, in any country, if you do the math in an unbiased fashion. See above.
 
Yes we should talking about them, we should also be talking high efficiency petrol engines that also exist in the EU. The point here is that the decision to go for EV is being based on an invalid starting point, the numbers _don't_ add up if you look at modern efficient engines as tend to be used in the EU.

That isn't necessarily true. IF you are talking about a teeny little petrol car then you can talk about a teeny PHEV. Comparing across classes is a really common fallacy. People compare a mid size car PHEV to an SUV, or a small car to a mid size PHEV. You have to keep things consistent or it means nothing.
 
And if Finland isn't a cold enough, diesels are used in Antarctica.

I never said diesels had problems running. Industrial uses are quite different, unless you expect antarctic expeditions are heading to the office and leave the vehicles sit while they work for 8 hours. I expect like northern Canadian mining operations, when the vehicles are out and in use... they are running.

Atleast 50% of all cars in norway are diesels. -20 is a normal cold winter day in the capital (which lies in the south.) In the north -40 celcius is not unheard of in any given year. -50 also happens.

Oslo is quite a bit more moderate in the winter than where I live. ;)

While diesels have problems with cold, i believe you are grossly exagurating them. There are ways to overcome them, like Evil pointed out.

How am I exaggerating anything? I said that it's a concern. I have some family who maintain oil and gas wells around here, they won't use diesel trucks because they are harder to start in the winter (and they don't want to leave them run constantly because they are contract labor and pay their own fuel costs), and getting stuck 50 miles from nowhere in a field isn't a good idea.

Otherwise im sure that the inhabitants of a country with 90 000+ USD GDP per capita per year could have afforded to switch to petrols. Since if the -20 celcius and below thingy would hold, we wouldn't be able to use our cars for very significant periods of the year.

First of all my sources suggest Norways GDP is closer to 60k per capita than 90k, 2nd of all I never suggested it was impossible to use them or anything. I merely said I expect there adoption may have been hampered by winter starting.

I also believe the car topgear used to reach the north pole was a 3.0 diesel toyota hilux...

again, not exactly useful information as even gasoline engines would suffer the same issues at those extreme conditions, a problem best solved by not shutting the vehicle down for any extended period.

Anyway, this really isn't all that on topic. I think electric has a long way to progress, but its already at a point where it can significantly reduce dependence on fossil fuels. IF I had a use for a small commuter, I'd certainly look at electric, the subsidies here don't make them as attractive as in the US however. Volume should help so every new electric rollout helps imo.
 
Oslo is quite a bit more moderate in the winter than where I live. ;)

And thats why i pointed out that in the north -40-50 is not unheard of.



First of all my sources suggest Norways GDP is closer to 60k per capita than 90k, 2nd of all I never suggested it was impossible to use them or anything. I merely said I expect there adoption may have been hampered by winter starting.

I see you looked at "international dollars". In nominal dollars, CIA factbook says 88.4k usd, while IMF says 84k.

I said 90k USD, not 90k international dollars. (Which is why i also poitned out price differences. International dollars are weighted for price levels)

GDP in 2010 was 2509 billion NOK. We have 4.8 million inhabitants. Do the math yourself. www.ssb.no (they have english versions).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I have worked out the numbers. PHEV absolutely is worth it in Europe. Just think about a company leasing cars for its employees. It can pay €200/mo for the lease and €125/mo for gas or it can pay €300/mo for the lease and maybe €20/mo for electricity (night charging). The latter can probably pay for a €10k higher sticker price (depending on residuals and interest), which should cover the cost of PHEV.


Those are ridiculous numbers, your assuming that this hybrid never uses gas. Far from everybody is driving only short distances.
 
That isn't necessarily true. IF you are talking about a teeny little petrol car then you can talk about a teeny PHEV. Comparing across classes is a really common fallacy. People compare a mid size car PHEV to an SUV, or a small car to a mid size PHEV. You have to keep things consistent or it means nothing.

Eh, the blue motion golf TDi will to 75MPG, that's hardly a small car, unfortunately VW haven't released their PHEV yet so don't have the comparison point, will be interesting when they do.
 
Eh, the blue motion golf TDi will to 75MPG, that's hardly a small car, unfortunately VW haven't released their PHEV yet so don't have the comparison point, will be interesting when they do.

Ehm. Golf is not a small car?

Compared to what? A fiat Uno?
 
Eh? How is it the basis of my augment, try reading everything as a whole rather taking things out of context.
When you said 15k is the cost of replacing your car, then it absolutely was the basis of your argument. You're not supposed to look at the cost of the whole car, you're supposed to look at the cost of adding hybrid/PHEV tech, i.e. the differential. You did later, and that's why you went from 15k to 6k, but not originally.

No it isn't, that's 6K on a car with substantially higher fuel economy than I currently drive, get's you to a pretty similar period of time to recover the cost as it's burning 50% less fuel than I am currently.
50% less fuel? So you're talking about 70MPG cars now? What car is this? How many people are buying them?

Look at a performance sedan like the M35. The hybrid gives you the same performance as the non hybrid (~10km/L) for €6k. Add 10kWh of batteries (maybe €4k), and every charge/discharge (40km) saves you 4L (€7) of gas but costs under €0.50 to fill at night. Interest rates are low, so it'll take under 1500 cycles to break even.

There is definitely a place for PHEV even when you ignore the environmental benefits, and in a few years it will be economical for the majority of european car buyers.

Electricity costs are more likely to be around 25% of the fuel costs
If you charge during the daytime peak, that's possible. Market electricity price at night is near zero (example), so assuming night time electricity users aren't subsidizing daytime users (which is unfortunately the case in areas without smart meters), it will be much less than that.

Your also ignoring the fact that many fleet cars are high mileage i.e. they don't do short enough runs for the overnight charge to get them through the following day, so fuel costs will still be far from zero
In that case, the battery gets used to its fullest ability and maximizes gas savings. Maybe gas costs without PHEV are 200/mo and with PHEV are 60/mo. The savings are still there.

Look, this is what the numbers boils down to: How many miles can each kWh of a battery displace, and at what cost? If you can do 2000 cycles (A123 is saying 80% capacity after 7000 cycles, so I'm being very conservative), it will give you ~10000 km for a ~$700 battery and $100-$200 of night electricity. For you, gas is $2.50/L, so a typical 7L/100km car will need $1750 of gas to cover the same distance. So that's ~$850k saved per kWh of battery. All you need is enough batteries (and matching daily driving, of course) for that to cover the electronics, electric motor, R&D, etc.

Interesting suggestion, but the manufacture looses on low mileage users and high mileage users loose as well, so it isn't profitable to everyone.
True, but that's why you sell to corporations first. They have an idea of what mileage will be put on, and you can use different sized batteries.

They don't, in any country, if you do the math in an unbiased fashion. See above.
They do. See above.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Eh, the blue motion golf TDi will to 75MPG, that's hardly a small car, unfortunately VW haven't released their PHEV yet so don't have the comparison point, will be interesting when they do.
As I said, the consideration isn't just diesel, it's all higher efficiency combustion engines that should be considered. Further governments can tax less fuel efficient cars off the road (as they already are in the EU). It most definitely isn't a dead end.
All higher efficiency ICEs are already being considered. They've been a staple of marketing for many years, with every manufacturer trying to get better. My point is clear: encouraging people to buy diesel does nothing for system-wide efficiency and pollution. If diesel consumption goes up, then gasoline consumption will as well (of course, peak oil precludes this from happening in a significant way so in reality diesel prices will go up until consumption goes down).

So please, stop with the TDI discussion. We can't have more than a few percent of the population transition to diesel engines.
 
Ehm. Golf is not a small car?

Compared to what? A fiat Uno?

The interior space is really spacy though :) and VW has two models under it. Polo and Lupo. Golf is 4.2m long and is growing out of the small car group and at the same time more and more smaller cars than the Golf are coming out. It's a big small car hehe.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mintmaster said:
Add $50/mo to each case. Are you proud for making a point that has no impact on the discussion?

Very proud. However i think your drawing numbers from thin air. A prius has worse economy than a golf tdi...
 
Back
Top