CAFE credits for EVs - will we repeat the E85 system?
Posted Nov 5th 2009 2:49PM by Sebastian Blanco
What is a plug-in vehicle worth? When it comes to CAFE credits, the answer to this question is a bit complicated. As we discussed in our Greenlings look at CAFE, the system allows for credits. One effect is that automakers who build vehicles that can burn E85 – even if these cars don't actually use the biofuel – get a bit of a pass for their dirtier vehicles. When it comes to EVs, a potential "sell one, get one free" deal is in the works.
Basically, the system might allow plug-in vehicles to count as 1.2 or even 2 vehicles in the fleet calculations,and so each EV could offset something big and fuel inefficient. This might result in getting plug-in vehicles to market while also allowing bug SUVs to remain in production. Unsurprisingly, the Auto Alliance, made up of most of the big OEMs, loves the idea. Alliance spokesman Charles Territo said that, "The ability to earn, trade and bank credits" by producing electric and hybrid vehicles "is essential to meeting the goals of the national program." The next big CAFE goal is 35.5 mpg by 2016.
John DeCicco, senior lecturer at the University of Michigan's School of Natural Resources and Environment, told HybridCars that the EV credit system under discussion is potentially confusing. "Funny math can't substitute for engineering breakthroughs. EVs of any sort can only make a real difference if they succeed on their merits for both customer value and emissions reduction. Bonus credits may fool a few starry-eyed policymakers, they won't fool either the marketplace or the Earth's atmosphere."
Source: HybridCars]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
jake 3:14PM (11/05/2009)
I'm a plug-in/BEV fan, but BEVs already have inflated MPG numbers for CAFE (the Tesla gets a 256mpg number even though the plug to wheel number is closer to 100mpg and the well to wheel number is in the 40mpg range when you only count fossil fuel plants). Plug-in hybrids also have inflated numbers (230mpg for the Volt) which usually don't count the electricity component.
Is this measure going to be on top of these inflated numbers? I understand the need of an incentive to get automakers to make plug-ins (which so far are more expensive than conventional vehicles) but is this going too far?
Reply
Avro 3:50PM (11/05/2009)
Jake,
The CAFE credits are meant to help automakers meet the goal of an average 42 mpg for cars by 2016 for their fleet of vehicles sold. So, with this EV incentive, an automotive company has a higher incentive to spend resources on delivering electric vehicles rather than spending them on other things (whether that's a bad thing or a good thing is up for debate). By how I understand it, the calculations for this are strictly for regulatory purpose and consumers will not see that measure.
Also, your comment further proves the point that a mpg rating system does not work when you throw in different energy sources into the mix.
For example, the Tesla's plug to wheel efficiency is most likely over 90%, given typical electric motor configuration efficiencies. You could find a gasoline fuel equivalent value, but that wouldn't mean much.
This is not a case of inflating values, but trouble applying calculations meant for a specific fuel to electric drives.
On a full electric vehicle, an mpg rating is almost completely pointless.
jake 4:33PM (11/05/2009)
They do have a fuel content factor value of 1/0.15 = 6.67, so it is inflating numbers. They way they do it for BEVs is to take equivalent efficiency number from well to wheel (counting fossil fuel plants only) and multiply it by 6.67. So for example the Tesla is ~38mpg*6.67 = ~256mpg, which is how they get these high numbers. The 38mpg number isn't that fair since it doesn't include sources like wind, hydro ,and nuclear which makes no direct pollution (also local areas will have different mixes), but a 6.67x is already more than enough to account for this. For plug-ins, I'm not as sure how they do it for CAFE, but from the Volt's 230mpg EPA number I'm quite sure they didn't even factor in the electricity usage.
The fuel content factor is there to encourage alternative fuel vehicles. Having plug-ins counted as 1.2 or 2 vehicles would be an additional incentive on top of that. I don't know if it is such a good idea to have too much, since it allows for automakers to game the system (just make enough plug-ins to satisfy requirements; having the 2x factor just means they need to make 1/2 as many plug-ins). In the end, with this additional factor, this may lead to the CAFE being much less effective as a emissions reducing initiative, since automakers can game the system.
Yes, as a consumer these CAFE mpg numbers don't directly matter, but as an energy policy they do. (Although for the Volt, the 230mpg number might be on the sticker ,so it might matter to the consumer; for BEVs they use a kWh/100 miles rating on the sticker).
Dan 12:14PM (11/06/2009)
Jake, I understand where your coming from. But then we/you should be complaining that there are not well to wheels stats for all vehicles.
Dont compare apple to oranges.
I disagree with the epa #'s so far, but not as much as you do.
The reason why they are giving PHEV's/EV's mpg #'s... thats a way to compare them with ICE's and hybrids.
They definitely need to split the numbers...
Have expected city/hwy range(distance) for EV and city/hwy mpg for extended range (Gas).
which really means four numbers... which is the only way it makes sense/easy to understand (especially for general consumer).
If you give the gen. consumer one huge number, they likely will be confused. Even though I understand how they get that number, it doesnt really tell you what you should expect when using which fuel.
It makes sense to give hybrids (Prius etc) MPG numbers since all the energy comes from gas. But with plug-ins there are two sources of energy. Therefore have to be city/hwy for both of those sources.
And the well to wheels numbers is technically a different argument...
Definitely one I agree with. The fuel is shipped and trucked by using fuel. Which only goes to prove electricity the best source. It is not only solely created in The United States, but can also be created at home, and in many ways.
xuchaoxio05 7:29AM (11/07/2009)
Christmas is around the corner: And old customers can also enjoy the gifts sent by my company in a can also request to our company. Gifts lot,Buy more get the more。Only this site have this treatment
Our goal is "Best quality, Best reputation , Best services". Your satisfaction is our main pursue. You can find the best products from us, meeting your different needs.
http://www.fogz.eu/34r4f
New to Hong Kong : Winter Dress
---**** NHL Jersey Woman $ 40 ---**** NFL Jersey $ 35
---**** NBA Jersey $ 34 ---**** MLB Jersey $ 35
---**** Jordan Six Ring_m $36 ---**** Air Yeezy_m $ 45
---**** T-Shirt_m $ 25 ---**** Jacket_m $ 36
---**** Hoody_m $ 50 ---**** Manicure Set $ 20 ... ...
HOT SELL Product Brand is below:
Nike Air Jordan(1-25)/Jordan Six Ring/Jordan Fusion/Nike Shox/Air Max/AF1/Dunk: $32
Polo/Ed Hardy/Lacoste/Ca/A&F ……T-shirt:
Coach /Gucci/Lv/Ed Hardy/D&G/Fendi ……Handbag:$35
Christian Louboutin/Lv/Ed Hardy/Gucci/Coach/Lacoste/ Timbland……
True Religion/Coogi/Evisu/Ed Hardy/Prada ……Jeans:$30
New era/Gucci/Ed hardy ……cap : $13
Okely/Coach/D&G/Fendi/Gucci/Armani ……sunglass:$15
Nike shoes: 32$, True Religion jeans:30$, Ed Hardy, t-shirts:12$, NFL Jersey:20$,Boots UGG:50$
Welcome to Shopping→→→ http://www.fogz.eu/hkw8q
Thank you for visiting our website. Welcome to "you" to our valuable suggestions. Please remember our website "voguemalls" Thank you for visiting
I wish you a happy shopping
.5.4.....121`
Eletruk 6:18PM (11/05/2009)
Anything that prods the automobile manufacturers in to mass producing EVs is a good thing in my book. If you can't beat them with a stick (like the California CARB mandate) then try the carrot. If it improves their bottom line, they will sell them.
Reply
Eletruk 6:19PM (11/05/2009)
To bad they don't do a well to wheels calculation on gasoline itself.
Reply
why not the LS2LS7? 8:11PM (11/05/2009)
That'd be a bummer.
Reply