Should I treat myself to a Chevy Volt?

[easysurfer]

Yeah, Honda banked too much on the Insight. I think Honda got gun shy as they first tried to make their old relieable Civics into Hybrids but this didn't sell. So they went for the Insight which just seems and looks like cheap version of a Prius.

The Prius C seems well targeted to compete with both the Insight and regular Fit.

 

[youbet]

It was why are hybrid & EV buyers challenged on the economics, when luxury care buyers usually aren't?

Many hybrid and EV buyers boast of the money they're saving at the gas pump. They emphasize the economics. Luxury car buyers seldom emphasize the economy of their purchase but rather the features, comfort, performance, etc. It makes perfect sense to challenge hybrid and EV buyers on the economics and not luxury car buyers.

 

[Texas Proud]

I've wanted to see a Fit Hybrid too. I can only assume Honda is afraid a Fit Hybrid would cannibalize their (already anemic) Insight sales. Honda hasn't been very successful with hybrids for example the Accord Hybrid and the CRZ, and their other hybrids have been trounced by Toyota as well so far.

Midpack.... Hope you don't get upset at me...

But.... as you mention, economic decisions by the buyers have sunk Honda... as the Accord Hybrid clearly showed... just making a car Hybrid does not mean it will sell.... I also think this will happen to the Volt...

 

[Midpack]

Midpack.... Hope you don't get upset at me...

I don't get upset, life's too short. We disagree, or at least we started with different definitions of what economic challenges meant.

And I welcome different views than my own, you never learn anything talking to like minded people. This would be a very dull place if everyone was of the same view IMO. Like everyone here, I am well versed in some areas, but I have a lot to learn in others.

Cheers...

 

[ERD50]

Yes, let's confuse the issue and re-fight that battle again, it's only been a week since your post #154 http://www.early-retirement.org/forums/f28/gas-4-this-summer-60109-8.html.

I have a headache now, but that's my own fault...

You included 'reduces emissions' in your post as one of the advantages - so that can't be challenged, we just need to accept it?

I know you posted that chart, but the interactive graphic from SciAm paints a different picture (linked in that thread). It's not cut & dried.

Many hybrid and EV buyers boast of the money they're saving at the gas pump. They emphasize the economics. Luxury car buyers seldom emphasize the economy of their purchase but rather the features, comfort, performance, etc. It makes perfect sense to challenge hybrid and EV buyers on the economics and not luxury car buyers.

Exactly. Now, if that luxury car owner were to say 'My BMW leather seats are more comfortable than your Mercedes leather seats', that could be challenged (and I imagine it is, on the car forums).

And look at the ads - hybrids/EVs ads talk about the environment and/or gas prices (an economic issue); luxury cars ads talk about the luxury, they don't talk about the cost effectiveness of leather.

-ERD50

 

[Midpack]

You included 'reduces emissions' in your post as one of the advantages - so that can't be challenged, we just need to accept it?

1) Those were reasons a buyer could choose a hybrid or EV, right or wrong. "Unless you choose to spend the $3K for "reduced emissions, leading edge technology, geeky, quirky, different and/or green/eco-chic."

2) Your SciAm link compared EV's & plug-in hybrids to hybrids, we're comparing vs the mainstream conventional gasoline powered internal combustion engine car aren't we? See "Powering Plug Ins" below from your source...

3) Coal plants emit considerably more than natural gas or other power sources. Natural gas will likely take share from coal in the decades ahead Coal's Sunset: Will Natural Gas Replace Coal Power Plants? | Txchnologist.

4) Here's another source comparing EV's to gasoline powered cars, lower even in coal regions, much lower in the US aggregate:

An EV recharged from the existing US grid electricity emits about 115 grams of CO2 per kilometer driven (6.5 oz(CO2)/mi), whereas a conventional US-market gasoline powered car emits 250 g(CO2)/km (14 oz(CO2)/mi) (most from its tailpipe, some from the production and distribution of gasoline).The savings are questionable relative to hybrid or diesel cars (according to official British government testing, the most efficient European market cars are well below 115 grams of CO2 per kilometer driven, although a study in Scotland gave 149.5gCO2/km as the average for new cars in the UK), but would be more significant in countries with cleaner electric infrastructure. In a worst-case scenario where incremental electricity demand would be met exclusively with coal, a 2009 study conducted by the World Wide Fund for Nature and IZES found that a mid-size EV would emit roughly 200 g(CO2)/km (11 oz(CO2)/mi), compared with an average of 170 g(CO2)/km (9.7 oz(CO2)/mi) for a gasoline-powered compact car. This study concluded that introducing 1 million EV cars to Germany would, in the best-case scenario, only reduce CO2 emissions by 0.1%, if nothing is done to upgrade the electricity infrastructure or manage demand.

Electric car - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[ERD50]

1) Those were reasons a buyer could choose a hybrid or EV, right or wrong. "Unless you choose to spend the $3K for "reduced emissions, leading edge technology, geeky, quirky, different and/or green/eco-chic."

Right or wrong? OK, if that's the way you are looking at it. Regardless, I took the discussion to the question of whether it is right or not.

2) Your SciAm link compared EV's & plug-in hybrids to hybrids, we're comparing vs the mainstream conventional gasoline powered internal combustion engine car aren't we? See "Powering Plug Ins" below from your source...

I'm not. This is a Chevy Volt thread, it is a plug-in hybrid, so I (and SciAm) are comparing it to any viable alternatives. Why not include non-plug-in-hybrids? I see no reason to limit ourselves to any specific tech, we should use whatever solves the most problems for the lowest cost.

As I said earlier, a non-plug-in hybrid recovers wasted energy. It's a clear win - with one caveat; the only possible downside is if the environmental cost of the added stuff. Another possibility that I will discount is if carrying around the added weight more than offsets any gains. Clearly the added weight does not, or the mpg would be lower.

3) Coal plants emit considerably more than natural gas or other power sources. Natural gas will likely take share from coal in the decades ahead Coal's Sunset: Will Natural Gas Replace Coal Power Plants? | Txchnologist.

Apparently, the authors of that study in SciAm do not agree. I'm not sure of their methodology, maybe they are wrong. I think all I've said is that it isn't clear - we get different answers from different sources.

4) Here's another source comparing EV's to gasoline powered cars, lower even in coal regions, much lower in the US aggregate:
Electric car - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Again, no reason to exclude non-plug-ins. The question is does plugging in really improve the environment.

-ERD50

 

[My Dream]

I hope I didn't open up a can of worms re my last comments, although I do appreciate the resent posts. My only intent was to share my conversation I had with DW yesterday re ideas on her next car. I still have time since hers is still drivable but to be honest for us it was all about the math.

The way I see it, I she presently spends $2500.00 (Canada pricing) in gas per year at today's gas prices. Should it rise well (it's anyone guess) and the same can be said about hydro prices then it would be more. If she were to get a Chevy Volt, her yearly gas/hydro charge (based on 6 cents per kwh) would be anywhere from $250.00 to $1000.00. My math tells me the gas savings aren't worth the added costs of the Volt at the present Canadian MSRP. It would have to come down substantially for the incentive to be there to purchase.

I haven't touched upon how it will or won't effect the environment since at this point it's a cost factor. She likes the Chevy Cruise and presently drives an Acura Vigor so the change is welcome.

As mentioned I'm going to wait it out and see how the pricing if any will change. At this point it time, based on my math, its not truly cost effective to pay the extra price here in Canada.

Again I appreciate the heated debate but it's getting too technical for me. Maybe I'll wait for the conclusion if there ever is one.


Thanks.

 

[ERD50]

... My math tells me the gas savings aren't worth the added costs of the Volt at the present Canadian MSRP. It would have to come down substantially for the incentive to be there to purchase.

MyDream - can you fill us in on the incentives(subsidies?) in Canada. Here in the US, there is a $7,500 credit for the first 200,000 vehicles per mfg.

I haven't touched upon how it will or won't effect the environment since at this point it's a cost factor.

Again I appreciate the heated debate but it's getting to technical for me. Maybe I'll wait for the conclusion if there ever is one.

It's complicated, don't hold your breath while waiting for a conclusion But the math for cost/payback is more straightforward.

-ERD50

 

[My Dream]

MyDream - can you fill us in on the incentives(subsidies?) in Canada. Here in the US, there is a $7,500 credit for the first 200,000 vehicles per mfg.

In my Province of Ontario, the incentive is around $8500.00 but the MSRP is just over $41000. which is higher then in the States. Keep in mind that gas prices are also higher in Canada therefore the savings, fuel wise would be somewhat greater. As for hydro rates our evening/night rate is 6 cents per kwh, I'm not sure how that compares to our neighbours to the south. Iit would cost around $1.00-$1.25 for a full charge and based on my wifes driving it would need a charge ever 2-3 days so as to not need to run on fuel.

Again, at this point it's strickly about the math and so far the Volt seem to have the best saving, as well as the highest purchase price.

 

[Zathras]

+1

Thank you, Zathras --- for your thoughts.

For the record, after reading everyone's comments and test driving a Volt, I made up my mind and bought a 2012 Volt right before Thanksgiving. To date, I have only had to put 4 gallons of gas in the tank to replenish it. It is by far, EV or not, the nicest, most comfortable, quiet, luxurious ride I've ever had. And now that gas prices in my area are almost $4.00 per gallon, I am doubly glad that I bought the Volt.

My pleasure! Congrats on your new car
Nothing beats (for me) the quite and smoothness driving under electric power.

 

[Nords]

To date, I have only had to put 4 gallons of gas in the tank to replenish it.

Congratulations on your new car! We want pictures!!!
One question - what does the owner's manual say about the need to 'exercise' the gas engine? I'd be concerned you are using it so infrequently the gas in your tank could go bad. (I know, there's always something...)

You want a car owner to read their owner's manual?!? Those things are almost as big as reactor plant manuals now!

I agree that the exhaust system is a concern... and I'm wondering if Volt owners have to add Sta-Bil to their fuel tanks.

I'll ask my Volt gear-head buddy up the street. He usually cruises around the neighborhood in his battery-boosted recumbent bicycle, so I'm sure his Volt's catalytic converter is quietly rusting away too.

 

[easysurfer]

Listening to the news today. The news mentioned that a by product of the higher gas prices is that folks are out to purchase more fuel efficient vehicles instead of their old cars. In a way, I guess it's similar to a run on slow blowers before and after a blizzard.

http://moneyland.time.com/2012/03/0...-already-driving-less-buying-better-mpg-cars/

 

[meierlde]

You want a car owner to read their owner's manual?!? Those things are almost as big as reactor plant manuals now!

I agree that the exhaust system is a concern... and I'm wondering if Volt owners have to add Sta-Bil to their fuel tanks.

I'll ask my Volt gear-head buddy up the street. He usually cruises around the neighborhood in his battery-boosted recumbent bicycle, so I'm sure his Volt's catalytic converter is quietly rusting away too.

Actually GM has put all of its cars owners manual online, search for chevy volt owners manual. I checked and if the fuel gets to old, a warning message appears, saying to accept going to gasoline mode until you refill the tank.

 

[Nords]

Actually GM has put all of its cars owners manual online, search for chevy volt owners manual. I checked and if the fuel gets to old, a warning message appears, saying to accept going to gasoline mode until you refill the tank.

I guess that's better than a "Check Gas Tank!" light and the dealer's $45 bottle of fuel preserver.

I had a big driving month with our Prius and got 550 miles before I had to add just over nine gallons to the gas tank. The cruise control has a much lighter touch than even I do.

 

[Bestwifeever]

Everybody wants a hybrid! Even Justin Bieber (they must have been out of the Volts):

Justin Bieber gets a Fisker Karma for his 18th birthday on 'Ellen' - chicagotribune.com

 

[Midpack]

Listening to the news today. The news mentioned that a by product of the higher gas prices is that folks are out to purchase more fuel efficient vehicles instead of their old cars. In a way, I guess it's similar to a run on slow blowers before and after a blizzard.

Gas Prices Continue to Rise as Americans Start Driving Less, Buying Fuel-Efficient Cars | Moneyland | TIME.com

Same thing that happened with the last gas price spike in 2008. There were waiting lists for higher mpg cars, and for a while there you could buy full sized pickups & SUV's discounted by almost 50%. But we're a fickle bunch, we can seemingly change on a dime...

 

[samclem]

Same thing that happened with the last gas price spike in 2008. There were waiting lists for higher mpg cars, and for a while there you could buy full sized pickups & SUV's discounted by almost 50%. But we're a fickle bunch, we can seemingly change on a dime...

This behavior really makes me doubt any idea that consumers (in general) are engaging in coldly rational decisionmaking when buying a car. I think few do the number-crunching we yak about here. It's more like "Honey, gas is gonna go to $4 a gallon. We need a car that gets better mileage." I doubt 25% are doing the math on depreciation, etc. I've heard of folks who do a lot of long-distance driving (between cities in Texas, etc) and were disappointed in the mileage of their hybrid. I guess you can put the sticker on the window (price, mileage, etc) but you can't make folks do the math.

 

[ziggy29]

But the environmental issue does get much more questionable for EVs and plug-ins, which are largely coal burning machines.

Unlike gas-powered vehicles, though, it does not *have* to be the case that these (even if indirectly) use polluting fossil fuels. These cars are as clean or as dirty as the mix of energy sources on the power grid.

Unfortunately I've found that many of the people who are most critical of EVs because the grid is often using coal are the same people who are the most critical of efforts to "green up" the grid. Not pointing at anyone in particular here, but it seems to be a common theme.

 

[Texas Proud]

Unlike gas-powered vehicles, though, it does not *have* to be the case that these (even if indirectly) use polluting fossil fuels. These cars are as clean or as dirty as the mix of energy sources on the power grid.

Unfortunately I've found that many of the people who are most critical of EVs because the grid is often using coal are the same people who are the most critical of efforts to "green up" the grid. Not pointing at anyone in particular here, but it seems to be a common theme.

Heck, I would love to have them get rid of those grandfather clauses for polluters... why should someone get a pass on a polluting plant just because they built it 20 years ago... sure, I can see phasing in the reduction, but a pass

 

[Texas Proud]

I was thinking about something that ERD said... about looking at the Hybrids vs Volt instead of an ICE vs Volt....

That does seem to be a good analysis I had not thought about.... is the Volt worth the extra $10K to $15K if there were no incentives And I am only talking about the gas savings, pollution benefits.... not the emotional aspects... Off the top of my head I would think not...

So, again I can see the demise of the Volt once the subsidy is gone... it just can not compete with the Prius or many of the other Hybrids out there...

 

[ziggy29]

That does seem to be a good analysis I had not thought about.... is the Volt worth the extra $10K to $15K if there were no incentives And I am only talking about the gas savings, pollution benefits.... not the emotional aspects... Off the top of my head I would think not...

So, again I can see the demise of the Volt once the subsidy is gone... it just can not compete with the Prius or many of the other Hybrids out there...

There is always going to be a fraction of the public that wants something regardless of the cost-benefit analysis. And God bless them, I say, because without them there would be some good ideas which never would have gone mainstream and affordable to the general public because of gradual widespread acceptance. We can argue all we want about the politics of subsidy, but even if that wasn't in play this remains generally true. Some people want them, support the concept and want to "vote with their wallet" regardless of whether it's the optimal economic decision.

If all consumers refused to pay the "early adopter tax" I dare say not many of the technologies we enjoy today would have ever become cost-effective.

 

[ERD50]

Unlike gas-powered vehicles, though, it does not *have* to be the case that these (even if indirectly) use polluting fossil fuels. These cars are as clean or as dirty as the mix of energy sources on the power grid.

True, but the reality is we are largely using coal, and that does not seem likely to change much very soon. We have to deal with the realities.

It is great that EVs are 'source neutral', they don't care where the kW came from, they are flexible. But that is pretty much a theoretical advantage, unless we get some breakthrough in green electrical energy.

Unfortunately I've found that many of the people who are most critical of EVs because the grid is often using coal are the same people who are the most critical of efforts to "green up" the grid. Not pointing at anyone in particular here, but it seems to be a common theme.

I'm not sure what you are talking about. Again, there are realities associated with the green tech we have now. Wind is intermittent, solar is avail during the day when EVs charge at night. Facing the realities is different than 'being against it'. Some of the best places for off-shore wind are being fought by some people who should be in favor of the green energy, but don't want their ocean view affected.

I'd say it is the 'greenies' themselves that are most responsible for the amount of coal we burn. They fought nukes tooth and nail. But France seems to be doing pretty well with something like 80% nuke electrical power, and only ~ 4% coal.

Here's what seems odd to me. France should be a great place for EVs, cleaner grid, generally smaller cars, shorter drives, and higher petrol prices - a great match. Yet, no big adoption rates there. It sure seems to me that since much pollution is a world-wide problem, that EVs should be filling Europe before we have many here. Just seems like a much better bang for the buck, yet, it hasn't happened yet. That speaks volumes to me.


edit/add: Here's a radical thought. I'd actually be more in favor of providing a US subsidy to EV buyers in France. Those who favor subsidies say they will speed the manufacturing cost curve (I don't agree) . But it makes no difference if the manufacturers learn to reduce costs by selling a car n France or the US. Might as well get more environmental benefit from that French power for our $. And it should tale less of subsidy, as I mentioned, they already have a better profile for EV usage anyhow. But don;t get me wrong, I still don't favor subsidies (I actually think they are counter-productive to EV adoption).

-ERD50

 

[ziggy29]

I'd say it is the 'greenies' themselves that are most responsible for the amount of coal we burn. They fought nukes tooth and nail. But France seems to be doing pretty well with something like 80% nuke electrical power, and only ~ 4% coal.

Here's what seems odd to me. France should be a great place for EVs, cleaner grid, generally smaller cars, shorter drives, and higher petrol prices - a great match. Yet, no big adoption rates there. It sure seems to me that since much pollution is a world-wide problem, that EVs should be filling Europe before we have many here. Just seems like a much better bang for the buck, yet, it hasn't happened yet. That speaks volumes to me.

Pollution of the world is a "tragedy of the commons" situation. France could adopt EVs on a wide scale given their own greener grid, but unless the rest of the world follows, it's not like polluted air and water will stop at their border.

We don't even have to go all in with "green" power. We have enough natural gas to last a century, maybe more, with just supplies from the US and Canada. Given that it probably pollutes 10% as much as conventional coal, if that... seems like "low hanging fruit" for a transition to greener renewables as the technology makes them more feasible and cost-effective.

 

[Midpack]

True, but the reality is we are largely using coal, and that does not seem likely to change much very soon. We have to deal with the realities.

Why can't I find a source that supports "largely using coal" that your POV hinges on? In addition to the one I posted yesterday from wiki, here's EIA, EPA, etc., and there are many more (Google). I am not omitting sources that show otherwise, I can't find any! Also note that almost all the power plant construction in the past 20 years has been natural gas, not coal.