GRA
Posts: 11174
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

GCC: Emissions Analytics: mass adoption of hybrids, rather than low-volume BEVs most effective for cutting CO2 now, meet

Wed Jun 19, 2019 5:54 pm

Emissions Analytics: mass adoption of hybrids, rather than low-volume BEVs most effective for cutting CO2 now, meeting 2030 targets; best use of limited resource
https://www.greencarcongress.com/2019/0 ... 18-ea.html
Emissions Analytics, a leading independent specialist for the scientific measurement of real-world emissions, suggests that mass adoption of hybrid vehicles, rather than low-volume take-up of full BEVs, is the most effective solution to cutting CO2 now and also in meeting 2030 emission targets.

Of all electrification strategies, full BEVs currently offer the least effective CO2 reduction per kWh of battery size, according to the analysis by the firm: 21 times worse than mild hybrids and 14 times worse than full hybrids.

With automotive battery capacity currently scarce, expensive and suffering supply problems, the deployment of this limited resource is critical to maximizing CO2 reduction, Emissions Analytics says. With tardy consumer adoption of BEVs and slow infrastructure roll-out compounded by concerns around an economical supply of batteries, it is essential to find the fastest, most efficient way to reduce CO2 now.
  • One of our biggest challenges is fleet turnover, with vehicles staying on the road typically for up to 12 years. It means that refreshing the entire fleet is a very slow process. Given reservations about current BEVs, we require an alternative that will have a more immediate impact. Due to CO2’s long life in the atmosphere, a small change now is far better than a large change in the future. We need to optimize the use of the industry’s available battery capacity to facilitate a critical early reduction.

    —Nick Molden, CEO of Emissions Analytics. . . .
Using mild, full and plug-in hybrid real-world emissions test data from both European and US vehicles, Emissions Analytics compared hybrids with their internal combustion engine equivalents. Using its standardized on-road cycle, the company determined the average CO2 reduction from hybridization was 23% for the EU and 34% for the US, with an average of 30% across all pairings.

Emissions Analytics then calculated the distance-specific CO2 reduction per unit of battery size (capacity), in g/km/kWh, for mild, full, plug-in hybrids and BEVs.

The results indicated that mild hybrids are the most efficient way to reduce CO2, given limited global battery capacity. With a reduction of 73.9g/km/kWh, the technology was a clear favorite, with full hybrids coming in second at 50.5g/km/kWh.

Due to their disproportionately large batteries, BEVs were the worst of the available options, with a mere 3.5g/km/kWh reduction. The size of BEV batteries tends to be large to accommodate infrequent, extreme use cases—such as high-mileage trips, not often undertaken by average drivers—and do not make the best uses of limited supply.

The calculations did not take into account the upstream CO2 in fuel extraction, refining and transportation, or the production and distribution of electricity. Some studies suggest the upstream CO2 of electricity is greater than for gasoline, but the relative efficiency calculations here implicitly assume they are equal. . . .

Molden outlined two potential paths that are immediately available. One is a switch from gasoline to diesel, reducing CO2 by 11%, coupled with a mild hybrid system, providing a further 6% reduction. A final swap to full hybrids would deliver an addition 16% reduction for a 34% total. Alternatively, switching directly from gasoline to gasoline mild hybrids provides an 11% reduction, with a further 23% from the move to full hybrid.

The EU’s post-2021 CO2 reduction target for passenger cars is 37.5% by 2030. Emissions Analytics tests clearly shows that, even with current technology, widespread hybridization would achieve more than three-quarters of that target.

Given a decade of further advances and innovations, it is possible that the goal could be met without the need for BEVs at all, Emissions Analytics says. Beyond the 37.5% reduction target, more extensive electrification would be required to bring whole fleet emissions down.
  • The ideal solution is an immediate transition to petrol and diesel hybrids, with a further decade spent refining the technology, infrastructure and battery supply chain to allow the adoption of BEVs. By 2030, the EU and the US would have had another decade to develop expanded, cleaner electricity generation capacity, improving the lifecycle emissions of BEVs.

    Alternatively, by 2030 the availability and price of renewable energy may well fall to a level at which hydrogen fuel cells could be economically viable. These avoid the environmental and geopolitical issues caused by largescale battery production and would likely offer even lower lifecycle emissions. The overall message is this though: it is paramount that governments and industry take into consideration real-world data when promoting technologies to efficiently reduce CO2.


    —Nick Molden. . . .
Not exactly news, but further confirmation.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

DarthPuppy
Posts: 728
Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2013 8:45 pm
Delivery Date: 11 Aug 2013

Re: GCC: Emissions Analytics: mass adoption of hybrids, rather than low-volume BEVs most effective for cutting CO2 now,

Wed Jun 19, 2019 9:32 pm

Interesting that they broke the hybrids down into 3 categories, but lumped all BEVs into 1 category. It would have been interesting to see the difference between short-range (say less than 100 miles) vs. medium-range (100 - 200 miles) and long-range BEVs. I suspect the short-range BEVs would score much better than the long-range ones. For typical driving models, the short range BEVs would get similar life-cycle miles but on much less battery capacity; thereby scoring much better in the analysis.

However, doing that would weaken the argument for hybrids over BEVs. I guess that was part of the study design intended to help support the desired conclusion.

Another skewing is that they compared mass adoption of hybrids vs. low adoption of BEVs. Mass adoption of BEVs can get there too, but to support that with the scarce battery issue, that mass adoption would need to be by short-range BEVs. Again, the lack of analysis on this segment ensures that their conclusion isn't contradicted by any annoying details.

Despite these design flaws, the conclusion makes a lot of sense. From a scarce resource allocation perspective, hybrids, PHEV, and short-range BEVs make a lot of sense. If (and that is a real big if) the battery supply constraints can be effectively dealt with, then the conclusion isn't so clear to me. But the constraints and ethical issues of battery sourcing do warrant considerable weight being given toward maximizing efficiency of that resource allocation.
'13 Leaf SL
'18 Honda Clarity Touring PHEV

SageBrush
Posts: 4907
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:28 am
Delivery Date: 13 Feb 2017
Location: NM

Re: GCC: Emissions Analytics: mass adoption of hybrids, rather than low-volume BEVs most effective for cutting CO2 now,

Wed Jun 19, 2019 9:39 pm

One gritty detail to work out: get people to buy them
2013 LEAF 'S' Model with QC & rear-view camera
Bought off-lease Jan 2017 from N. California
Two years in Colorado, now in NM
03/2018: 58 Ahr, 28k miles
11/2018: 56.16 Ahr, 30k miles
-----
2018 Tesla Model 3 LR, Delivered 6/2018

GRA
Posts: 11174
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: GCC: Emissions Analytics: mass adoption of hybrids, rather than low-volume BEVs most effective for cutting CO2 now,

Thu Jun 20, 2019 5:54 pm

DarthPuppy wrote:Interesting that they broke the hybrids down into 3 categories, but lumped all BEVs into 1 category. It would have been interesting to see the difference between short-range (say less than 100 miles) vs. medium-range (100 - 200 miles) and long-range BEVs. I suspect the short-range BEVs would score much better than the long-range ones. For typical driving models, the short range BEVs would get similar life-cycle miles but on much less battery capacity; thereby scoring much better in the analysis.

However, doing that would weaken the argument for hybrids over BEVs. I guess that was part of the study design intended to help support the desired conclusion.

Another skewing is that they compared mass adoption of hybrids vs. low adoption of BEVs. Mass adoption of BEVs can get there too, but to support that with the scarce battery issue, that mass adoption would need to be by short-range BEVs. Again, the lack of analysis on this segment ensures that their conclusion isn't contradicted by any annoying details.

Despite these design flaws, the conclusion makes a lot of sense. From a scarce resource allocation perspective, hybrids, PHEV, and short-range BEVs make a lot of sense. If (and that is a real big if) the battery supply constraints can be effectively dealt with, then the conclusion isn't so clear to me. But the constraints and ethical issues of battery sourcing do warrant considerable weight being given toward maximizing efficiency of that resource allocation.
I think most of your criticisms re different classes of BEV are covered by their analysis of PHEVs, especially as we know from experience here short-range, expensive BEVs don't meet most people's desires and value proposition. If short range BEVs cost $15k instead of $30k it would be a different matter, but given battery shortage and their current high prices, that's kind of a moot point. The Prime is selling quite well here, because it can meet many people's routine needs on the battery while still doing everything else a car needs to do, and starting at under $28k.

I think it really comes down to whether or not your over-riding priority is reducing GHGs as quickly and cheaply as possible, or reducing GHGs while also reducing local air pollution. The latter argues for PHEVs with the smallest possible battery, which I've suggested should provide at least 20 miles of AER in order to encourage people to actually plug them in instead of just buying them for HOV and similar perks, as we saw was sometimes the case here in California with the PiP; apparently a lot of Volts bought as company cars were also never plugged in.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

SageBrush
Posts: 4907
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:28 am
Delivery Date: 13 Feb 2017
Location: NM

Re: GCC: Emissions Analytics: mass adoption of hybrids, rather than low-volume BEVs most effective for cutting CO2 now,

Thu Jun 20, 2019 6:29 pm

GRA wrote:encourage people to actually plug them in instead of just buying them for HOV and similar perks, as we saw was sometimes the case here in California with the PiP; apparently a lot of Volts bought as company cars were also never plugged in.
This is my suspicion too, that PHEVs are way too often bought for the perks and then not used as intended (meaning daily charging for daily use.) I'm inclined to be against tax credits for PHEVs for this reason, and while the article is probably correct on paper, it is in my opinion likely wrong in practice.
2013 LEAF 'S' Model with QC & rear-view camera
Bought off-lease Jan 2017 from N. California
Two years in Colorado, now in NM
03/2018: 58 Ahr, 28k miles
11/2018: 56.16 Ahr, 30k miles
-----
2018 Tesla Model 3 LR, Delivered 6/2018

LeftieBiker
Moderator
Posts: 13419
Joined: Wed May 22, 2013 3:17 am
Delivery Date: 30 Apr 2018
Location: Upstate New York, US

Re: GCC: Emissions Analytics: mass adoption of hybrids, rather than low-volume BEVs most effective for cutting CO2 now,

Thu Jun 20, 2019 10:31 pm

SageBrush wrote:
GRA wrote:encourage people to actually plug them in instead of just buying them for HOV and similar perks, as we saw was sometimes the case here in California with the PiP; apparently a lot of Volts bought as company cars were also never plugged in.
This is my suspicion too, that PHEVs are way too often bought for the perks and then not used as intended (meaning daily charging for daily use.) I'm inclined to be against tax credits for PHEVs for this reason, and while the article is probably correct on paper, it is in my opinion likely wrong in practice.
When the PHEV gets outstanding fuel economy without being plugged in, that shouldn't be necessary. The Prius PHEV & Prime both get well over 50MPG when driven as plain hybrids. I wonder if people are driving Volt, Outlander and Niro PHEVs the same way, or if the MPG penalty is too great for those cars...?
Scarlet Ember 2018 Leaf SL W/ Pro Pilot
2009 Vectrix VX-1 W/18 Leaf modules, & 3 EZIP E-bicycles.
BAFX OBDII Dongle
PLEASE don't PM me with Leaf questions. Just post in the topic that seems most appropriate.

SageBrush
Posts: 4907
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:28 am
Delivery Date: 13 Feb 2017
Location: NM

Re: GCC: Emissions Analytics: mass adoption of hybrids, rather than low-volume BEVs most effective for cutting CO2 now,

Fri Jun 21, 2019 5:36 am

LeftieBiker wrote: When the PHEV gets outstanding fuel economy without being plugged in, that shouldn't be necessary.
What should not be necessary ?
2013 LEAF 'S' Model with QC & rear-view camera
Bought off-lease Jan 2017 from N. California
Two years in Colorado, now in NM
03/2018: 58 Ahr, 28k miles
11/2018: 56.16 Ahr, 30k miles
-----
2018 Tesla Model 3 LR, Delivered 6/2018

DarthPuppy
Posts: 728
Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2013 8:45 pm
Delivery Date: 11 Aug 2013

Re: GCC: Emissions Analytics: mass adoption of hybrids, rather than low-volume BEVs most effective for cutting CO2 now,

Fri Jun 21, 2019 11:20 pm

Some will abuse the concept. But PHEV remain a viable route to quickly reduce the pollutants. The fact that some don't plug them in doesn't warrant discriminating regarding the tax credits. When I replaced my ICEV with my Clarity PHEV and gained access to workplace charging, I eliminated 90+% of my gas consumption. If we are going to set the rules based on some people's conduct, then my example warrants higher tax credits because some get more GHG bang for the amount of scarce battery resource and therefore provide better environmental benefits on the whole.

Some BEV owners don't drive theirs to the fullest potential because of range anxiety or their Tesla sized batteries have far more range than they will use daily. Perhaps we shouldn't support tax credits for BEVs because of their conduct?

Sorry, but I can't buy into stances where if I own a BEV, that should be supported but other approaches shouldn't be supported because I can find some nit-pick about some people's conduct. Each of these approaches have their pros and cons and have been debated ad nauseam on this forum. And each is subject to non-optimal use by owners who choose poorly in terms of aligning their purchase and driving conduct in an effective manner to maximize environmental benefit.
'13 Leaf SL
'18 Honda Clarity Touring PHEV

DarthPuppy
Posts: 728
Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2013 8:45 pm
Delivery Date: 11 Aug 2013

Re: GCC: Emissions Analytics: mass adoption of hybrids, rather than low-volume BEVs most effective for cutting CO2 now,

Fri Jun 21, 2019 11:22 pm

SageBrush wrote:One gritty detail to work out: get people to buy them
Sadly, this is very true. :(
'13 Leaf SL
'18 Honda Clarity Touring PHEV

SageBrush
Posts: 4907
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:28 am
Delivery Date: 13 Feb 2017
Location: NM

Re: GCC: Emissions Analytics: mass adoption of hybrids, rather than low-volume BEVs most effective for cutting CO2 now,

Sat Jun 22, 2019 7:26 am

DarthPuppy wrote: Sorry, but I can't buy into stances where if I own a BEV, that should be supported but other approaches shouldn't be supported because I can find some nit-pick about some people's conduct..
Straw-man argument.

Social support of PHEV via subsidy must take the average plug-in owner behavior into account. This is all about utility.
However, if you want to scrap ALL subsidies and simply tax pollution you have my vote.
2013 LEAF 'S' Model with QC & rear-view camera
Bought off-lease Jan 2017 from N. California
Two years in Colorado, now in NM
03/2018: 58 Ahr, 28k miles
11/2018: 56.16 Ahr, 30k miles
-----
2018 Tesla Model 3 LR, Delivered 6/2018

Return to “Environmental Issues”