

Chevy Volt rated at 93/37mpg - ck2
http://www.engadget.com/2010/11/26/2011-chevy-volt-gets-stickered-93mpg-on-battery-37mpg-on-gasol/

======
hugh3
These numbers are meaningless; the EPA had to make up some kind of methodology
for assigning a "mpg" number to a car which isn't actually burning any
gasoline at all.

In my opinion it should say "Infinity miles per gallon" on the electric side
of the label. I'm guessing that half the reason they don't is because they
have these CAFE "average MPG standards" which they want to force automakers to
adhere to, and throwing infinities into the averages tend to mess things up.

I don't know why people are so down on the Volt -- I think it's an excellent
piece of technology, and probably the way of the future. An electric car with
a petrol-powered generator to keep you going after the batteries are flat is
the best of both worlds -- you can burn zero fuel most days, but still drive a
thousand miles in a day if you feel like it.

~~~
tshtf
I'm not sure "infinity miles per gallon" makes sense on the electric side. The
EIA publishes statistics about power generation in the United States:

<http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epa/epa_sum.html>

Since 68.8% of power generation in the United States comes from non-renewable
resources (coal, gas, and petroleum), it makes sense that the EPA would use
some sort of system to describe the MPG for cars running on electric power.

~~~
wtallis
Miles per gallon of coal?

If you're going to try to come up with an equivalent number, are you going to
base it on carbon emissions or on cost to the consumer? Either way, it will be
highly variable: gas prices fluctuate relative to electricity prices, and
different sources of electricity lead to different emissions per kWh.

At least with gasoline-powered cars, the differences between EPA estimates and
real-world consumption are factors under the driver's control. This isn't the
case with BS numbers for EVs, so the numbers end up being pretty much useless
to the consumer. If the number is not going to be useful to the consumer, then
there's no reason to mandate it be on the sticker.

~~~
hugh3
_If the number is not going to be useful to the consumer, then there's no
reason to mandate it be on the sticker._

Having _some_ sort of number there is useful; as electric cars become more
common we'll need some way of comparing their efficiency. Right now you can
find out that the Volt at 93 "mpge" is slightly less efficient than the Nissan
Leaf at 99 "mpge". I'd still much rather have it in the less ambiguous units
of miles per kilowatt hour.

(Or if they really want to appeal to physicists, they should give it in units
of inverse force. 1 mile per kilowatt hour = 447.04 inverse MegaNewtons.)

------
ck2
So WTF is with 37mpg - my 15 year old car (with the weight of poor 1990's
design, airbags, etc.) gets 35mpg (real-life).

I would love an electric car like the Leaf but if "Detroit" can't make a base
car that gets good mpg, adding electric won't help solve the efficiency. Why
not first make a car that by design can get 40+mpg in the CITY (not just
averaged).

Why wasn't part of the bail-out condition that they have to build something
like this in the USA:

[http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/08_37/b40990604...](http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/08_37/b4099060491065.htm?campaign_id=rss_daily)

~~~
hugh3
Why 37 mpg? Because when running in fuel-burning mode, the Volt is using the
engine to turn a generator which produces electricity to turn the wheels.
There's an inherent inefficiency in the extra step.

But that's the price you pay for being able to do your daily commute most days
without burning any petrol whatsoever.

~~~
ck2
I have to think it's all the extra weight in there too?

The shape reminds me very much of the VERY efficient Honda 1990 CRX HF (60mpg)

[http://www.engadget.com/photos/chevrolet-volt-dc-test-
drive/...](http://www.engadget.com/photos/chevrolet-volt-dc-test-
drive/#3544673)

vs.

<http://www.google.com/images?q=CR-X+HF>

------
makecheck
Perhaps the measure should be "miles per dollar of fuel or charge", which
would have to be averaged and could vary by region.

------
herewego
I partially look at hybrids and electric cars as a hedge against the
possibility of Peak Oil making a significant difference in oil prices at some
point in the next few years.

Might happen, might not. Regardless, I get to drive a fun new toy -- I find
the experience of driving a hybrid to be fun (the sound, instant torque, etc).

------
ax0n
And never mind the fact that in the vast majority of the US, you'll be burning
coal, petroleum or NG to recharge it.

~~~
ck2
There are currently no consumer power plants in the USA that burn oil.

But yeah coal is a huge problem (and the "clean" coal fallacy must die asap).

~~~
ghshephard
Source? I thought that Diesel was a fuel for peaking plants in the United
States.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peaking_power_plant>

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Load_following_power_plant>

~~~
ck2
I will have to google a bit but Carter phased out oil based plants after the
first crisis. I think it was called the "fuel use act".

Huh. Well I stand corrected:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Oil-
fired_power_statio...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Oil-
fired_power_stations_in_the_United_States)

But I also read elsewhere they only make up 8 percent of the total in the USA
and are being phased out.

~~~
ax0n
To counter this, places like Portland and Seattle get their electricity almost
exclusively from Hydroelectric. For those who are really willing to subsidize
the advancement of our independence on foreign oil, I suppose it could make
some sense if they live in areas like that. I still think the Bicycle is a
more elegant (and cheaper, more accessible and more disruptive) solution to
the problem.

------
ck2
Hmm who changed my title on this thread BTW?

The fact it was originally hyped at 230mpg is kinda important.

Anyway, did anyone notice how they did the press release the day before
Thanksgiving when the press is completely distracted/idle? What is up with
that? Are they trying to hide it?

~~~
ergo98
It was a trolling title. The EPA has been working out how they would rate
electric vehicles, and by the original criteria the LEAF would have been rated
at something like 367 mpg. The Volt hasn't suddenly become less efficient --
the rating criteria changed.

~~~
ck2
I wasn't trying to troll, was just disappointed. The original title was:

 _Chevy Volt fails hyped 230mpg and only gets 93/37mpg_

That's valid because they didn't just get a 230mpg rating - they advertised
the heck out of it, it was everywhere.

Then they quietly release this 93/37 rating the day before Thanksgiving when
the news is asleep and people are distracted elsewhere.

------
alextingle
Pft. My 5 year-old Peugeot 206 averages 60 mpg.

