Chevy Bolt EV Forum banner
  • Hey Guest, welcome to ChevyBolt.org. We encourage you to register to engage in conversations about your Bolt.

CA. requires units on chargers, not time.

7K views 78 replies 18 participants last post by  sly 
DC fast charging should be that much IMO. It should only be used for long trips and not an everyday occurrence. We need more level 2 charging for people in apartments, shopping plazas, and work places. The big issue to holding back EV adoption is for the majority of renter's it is inconvenient to have an EV.
 
L2 isn't going to solve a lot of public charging issues due to the design specification requiring hours of charging to get a decent charge. A better, more flexible solution is adding medium speed DCFC into the mix in some of the places described above. DCFC in the 25-50 kW range can deliver a decent, cost effective charge in time frames under an hour. Now it won't be a full 10-80% charge, but being able to recover 100 miles of recharge in an hour will be helpful to folks who supplement private or exclusively use public charging for their EVs.

ga2500ev
If people can charge overnight or during their 8 hour work day, level 2 will meet 99% of most people's needs. Fast charging should not be used unless for longer trips or emergency situations. Accessible level 2 charging at home/work is enough for the majority of people.
 
I am fine with more DC fast chargers, but you need to understand that electricity from these units are much more expensive and you have to pay $0.50 per kWh minimum for this convenience. People that depend on fast charging to do the majority of their driving should not own EVs at this point in adoption. Those people that have crazy jobs and are away from home a lot should own a hybrid right now. The 99% of us who live normal lives can charge at home or work. This makes level 2 charging more important and installing level 2 charging is a fraction of the cost.
 
There should be only two type of charging. 40 amp level 2 charging and DC fast chargers that can support up to 250 kW. Simplicity is what we need here. The general public is confused enough about charging, we don't need to have anymore variety of charging. Charge at work, charge near home, or pay a premium to charge your car as quickly as it allows. It should be that simple. BTW, it should also be mandated that any car over 150 mile range has fast charging. The Bolt still doesn't have this and probably upsets people when they find out all the can do is level 2 charge.
 
As for PHEVs, I've recently been reading up on the life-cycle CO2 costs of different powertrains. It just so happens that PHEVs have a significantly lower life-cycle CO2 cost that BEVs. That probably doesn't hold for a subcompact BEV with a range of about 70 miles, but beyond that, BEVs are worse that PHEVs.
You are reading FUD material, this is absolutely not true unless you live in a state like Wyoming that gets 80% of its electricity from coal. Please link the article to show this data, because it is complete nonsense.
 
I don't know the abbreviation "FUD" … can you expand? As regards to the material, I have searched and read a number of sources. I appreciate references, so if you have any that say otherwise, please share. One of the articles that I recently read was published by the Union of Concerned Scientists: "Cleaner Cars from Cradle to Grave". But it isn't the only one. Other sources gave the mpg of ICEVs needed for life-cycle CO2 costs to be lower than BEVs. The lowest states were in the Midwest where an ICEV with an mpg of > 35 was better than a BEV. In the PNW where I live, and ICEV would need an mpg > 95 to do better. But, considering that a properly-used PHEV drives > 90% of the time as an EV, one with reasonably-efficient hybrid operation would do far better than any BEV anywhere. If you have different sources or a different reasoned analysis, I am totally open to revising my position. However, just making a claim is not a reasoned analysis.
FUD is "Fear, uncertainty, and doubt", which is used in the big oil industry to stop people from buying BEV's.

I would agree that if a PHEV is used over 90% of the time it basically is a BEV. It would have a smaller battery, which means less CO2 in the production of the car. However, that 90% "properly-used" PHEV depends on many factors. For your case, a PHEV with a range of 20 to 30 miles may be enough for you to drive completely on the battery. If so, great for you.

My story is completely different. I commute 130 miles per day. If I drove a Volt it would be almost the exact same thing as driving a typical hybrid. I have posted many times here in the past that if you have a short commute or don't drive much to either get a PHEV or a used Leaf. The smaller the battery the better for the environment, plain and simple.

Please check Voltstats, this gives real data about how much someone actually drives completely on the battery. The average is nowhere close to above 90%, which you said it should be. It is at 66.5% for 88,493,526.84 miles driven. Pretty good data there. The Volt also has one of the longest ranges of any EV out there. Probably for all PHEV's the average is closer to 50% battery and 50% gas. So yes, for your situation a PHEV is probably better environmentally. However, for most Americans this is not the case.

This could lead into a pretty good discussion though. What size battery would the perfect PHEV have? Is the BMW i3 with REX the perfect electric car? With 120 miles of range would that satisfy 98% of electric range and the other 2% be gas. The smaller battery would make cars cheaper, less CO2 emissions to produce, and avoid high output fast chargers. This is a discussion I would love to have because it might be a great solution.
 
Thanks for the reply. It will take a bit of time to completely digest it. Proper usage is indeed very important. Not doing so is like buying a heavy-duty reusable plastic shopping bag but never actually reusing it, making it significantly worse. But, a good question is: What is the effective mpg of a PHEV as typically driven? If the PWN efficiency requirement of > 95 mpg is accepted, which is the highest in the U.S. and likely anywhere, then how much must a Volt be driven as an EV to break even? A Volt gets ~42 mpg in hybrid mode. So, EV mode %0 + Hybrid mode 100% = 42 mpg. If 50% of the driving was in in EV mode, total mpg = 82 mpg. But, using your figures, if 66.5% of driving is in EV mode, then the total mpg = 125 mpg. With a little math, the breakeven point of 95 mpg is achieved with just 56% of EV-mode driving. This makes a Volt as typically driven much better than a BEV even in the PNW, and far better anywhere else in the country. Much of the country will require a far smaller percent of EV-mode driving. So by these calculations, a PHEV with similar characteristics as a Volt, typically driven, is the clear winner. I would say that for BEV owners who are good at plugging in, a PHEV would be even better as they would be driving even more in EV mode. But each person will do best to modify that for their particular situation. Those with long commutes, meaning a low percentage of EV-mode driving, will certainly do better with a BEV, as will those who use a PHEV as just a hybrid. As for your specific situation, if you leave home with a full battery and are able to recharge to full at work, then your EV-mode percentage would be 61.5%, which would make a PHEV better even if you lived in the PNW. If you live elsewhere, then the threshold would be even lower.
You can't do the math like this. When I get home I can work out the math to compare a PHEV to a BEV. I teach physics so trust me on this one that you can't do the math you just did.
 
I look forward to your calculations, but if you could also explain a bit how I have miscalculated, I would appreceate that too.
Your calculations assume that the electricity has no CO2 impact. A 42 mpg car running at 84 mpg with 50% electricity makes no sense. By your calculations a BEV should get infinity mpg.

Edit: you need to take MPGe into consideration. Please read up on MPGe.
 
I look forward to your calculations, but if you could also explain a bit how I have miscalculated, I would appreceate that too.
BTW, my calculations will include CO2 emissions when the battery is made. Do you know that driving on pure electricity the Bolt gets more mileage? It is more efficient to drive a Bolt over a Volt. The Volt weighs more than the Bolt by 200 lbs.
 
A lithium-ion car battery has a life cycle CO2 cost of about 1.5 g CO2 / kwh / km. (1)
This is what I don't agree with and is a ridiculous number. Right now the accepted value for CO2 emissions is somewhere between 70 and 110 kg of CO2 per 1 kWh of battery. I will use the worse case of 110 kg per kWh in my calculation below. The 150 to 200 kg of CO2 per kWh of battery is old data that suggests the battery is made 100% from coal power. Tesla is probably somewhere between 80 and 90 kg of CO2 per 1 kWh of battery since they use Nevada's energy grid, which is much better than pure coal.

Lets take a look at that 1.5 g CO2 / kWh / km number you used. I have seen this before an it is based on the lifetime of the battery which is 10 years/150,000 km. BTW, this lifetime is nonsense because it takes into consideration only 93,000 miles before you discard the battery. The true lifetime of a Chevy Bolt battery could be 300,000 miles and then could be used for battery storage after that. So for 1.5 g CO2 / kWh / km number you used for 150,000 km, that is 225 kg of CO2, which is not even in the ballpark for the real amount of CO2 that is produced. Welcome FUD from German research trying to keep their diesel cars looking better.

I completely disagree with your calculations since you are assuming a battery is only used for 150,000 km, the battery uses 225 kg of CO2 to be produced, and that 8.9 kg of CO2 per gallon of gasoline is also not correct. That 8.9 kg of CO2 is only the combustion of gas and doesn't include extracting, refining, and transportation. The CO2 number for the battery includes mining, transportation, and manufacturing so we need to be consistent. The best number for gasoline is somewhere between 11 and 12 kg of CO2 per gallon of gasoline. I will use 11 kg in my calculation for the low estimate in the favor of the Volt. I also don't like your carbon intensity data since it is from 2012. Lots of things happened between that data and today in the US, for the good!

Here is a 100,000 mile and 200,000 mile calculation that is realistic. I am not going to do per 100 miles since I need to calculate when the battery will die. I can't predict that number. BTW, this is a worse case scenario since the batteries are not out of service at 100,000 miles or even 200,000 miles.

Bolt for 100,000 miles - 110 kg * 60 kWh + 0.11 * 100,000 = 17,600 kg
Bolt for 200,000 miles - 110 kg * 60 kWh + 0.11 * 200,000 = 28,600 kg

Volt for 100,000 miles - 110 kg * 16 kWh + 0.11 * 66,500 + 11*(33,500/42) = 17,848 kg
Volt for 200,000 miles - 110 kg * 16 kWh + 0.11 * 133,000 + 11*(67,000/42) = 33,398 kg

I gave the Volt the advantage in my consideration in both the battery and the gasoline emissions. I could have made the difference even bigger. I think the 66.5% calculation is fair for the Volt. The Volt also has to get oil changes and produces local emissions. However, a case can be made for a PHEV over a BEV if you take into consideration mileage driven and also if you can drive a PHEV over 90% electric it may be the better choice.
 
I'll look into your points further, but here are some quick points:

The numbers for the life-cycle CO2 cost of battery production come from work by Hall and Lutsey (2018). I'm not sure where they get their numbers, but it was a recent investigation. The range of values is 1 – 2 g CO2 / kWh / km. I chose 1.5 g as the midrange value. Their study is referenced in many recent reports, so you'll have to demonstrate that those figures are not correct. If you have truly new data, please share the reference. Furthermore, I gave a best-case (for the Bolt) scenario where I used the 1 g figure; it still didn't look good. Labeling data you don't like as “FUD” is disingenuous.

The Chevy Bolt battery pack is made in Michigan, not a state with the cleanest electricity. Cherry picking data by referring to Tesla's battery and implying that value should apply to all BEVs is not useful.

Your value of 225 kg CO2 for 150,000 km is not correct. 1.5g CO2 / kWh / km* 60 kWh * 150,00 km * 1 kg / 1000 g = 13,500 kg CO2.

The CO2 cost to refine 1 gallon of gas is roughly 1 kg. (http://www.afteroilev.com/Pub/CO2_Emissions_from_Refining_Gasoline.pdf) Please share a different reference if you don't like this one. That makes the total CO2 cost of 1 gallon of gas 9.9 kg / CO2, and the Volt CO2 cost for 33.5 hybrid miles is 7.92 kg. That increases the Volt CO2 cost by only ~ 0.8 kg CO2, far less than needed to overcome the Bolt's poorer numbers.

Changes to the electrical grid have been encouraging but pretty marginal, not nearly enough to overcome the Bolt's poor number, especially since I included a scenario which assume 0 CO2 electricity cost for propulsion.

I don't think you have made your case.
1 – 2 g CO2 / kWh / km is absolutely insane. That is considering 150,000 km of lifetime use and batteries shown they can be used much longer than that. In matter of fact you can use them after the car is done by taking the batteries and using them as solar energy batteries. Below is an article that you can read that shows that the number that Hall and Lutsey, which they reference, is way too high!
Please read the article to see that the 225 kg CO2 for 1 kWh of a lithium ion battery is nonsense.

Your value of 225 kg CO2 for 150,000 km is not correct. 1.5g CO2 / kWh / km* 60 kWh * 150,00 km * 1 kg / 1000 g = 13,500 kg CO2.
That 225 kg CO2 is for 1 kWh of battery produced. I didn't calculate it for the Bolt since that number is freaking insane.

The CO2 cost to refine 1 gallon of gas is roughly 1 kg.
That is correct. But what about drilling and transporting the oil? That is another 1 to 2 kg. I think you can agree with that.

I am not using the 1-2 g CO2 / kWh / km that assumes 150,000 km of useful life of a lithium ion battery. The useful life of a lithium ion battery is probably closer to 300,000 miles of use. Plus the bigger Bolt battery will have a longer life than a Volt battery because of the reduced charging cycles.

Please read that article I posted since it talks about many different studies on CO2 emissions from producing a battery.

The Chevy Bolt battery pack is made in Michigan, not a state with the cleanest electricity. Cherry picking data by referring to Tesla's battery and implying that value should apply to all BEVs is not useful.
The batteries for the Bolt are not made in Michigan, it is LG chem which has their factories in Korea. The data in the paper shows the Tesla is the lowest because of Nevada's energy production, but the 110 kg CO2 according to the many studies is a fair number to use for Korea's energy grid.
 
Thanks for the follow up and the reference. It might take a couple of days for me to investigate your post. But, from your reference, I think the following quote refering to the Tesla Model 3 is interesting:

"It still has lifetime emissions similar to the most efficient conventional cars in Germany and the US, but is, in all cases, a substantial improvement over the average conventional vehicle."

Given that a PHEV is far better than even an efficient conventional car, it would still appear that the PHEV wins over the BEV. This doesn't immediately look good for your position. I also don't think it is appropriate to rely on post-life-cycle possible uses to make up for a BEV deficit. If BEVs are clearly superior, it would not be necessary. I will explore these things further and modify my position if warranted, but it doesn't look promising even from your referenced source. But, give me a bit of time.
For heavy use a BEV is superior, but people don't drive like me. I put 40,000 miles on my car every year. The longer you drive a BEV, the better it gets. In my situation a BEV is superior considering I drive in California, have solar panels, and have a 130 mile commute every day. For me a BEV is much better for the environment than a PHEV, please prove me wrong about my situation.

Even if PHEV are more "green" right now, that won't be the case in 10 years. By pushing BEV technology, we will have a point where they will become better very soon. If we can produce a lithium ion battery with 50 kg of CO2 per kWh and the battery can last 1 million miles, BEV's will be superior in every way! Part of me adopting a pure EV is that I want this technology to win.

The other thing that is important to know is every year my BEV produces less emissions as the power grid becomes more renewable. This is not true of PHEV's since they always depend on fossil fuels. My argument right now is a PHEV like the Volt and BEV are probably about the same for the environment. I am not saying all PHEV's because they are making SUV one's that get like 15 mile range, 30 mpg, and will rely on 70% of the energy to be gas.

Just answer my question here. Would you agree that if we got battery emissions down to 70 kg per kWh and 70% of energy was renewable that a BEV would be superior to a PHEV? I know we aren't there yet, but that is the goal. We hit limits on ICE cars and hybrid technology. To take the next step in reducing CO2 we need to invest in BEV technology more.
 
CA requires batteries to be warrantied for 10 years and 150k miles. Manufacturers will build them to exceed this requirement to avoid warranty claims. 200k miles seems like a reasonable expectation for the lifetime of a battery, or any car in general.
That is PZEV, not ZEV cars. The Bolt is 8 years 100,000 miles. However your 200,000 mile expectation is a lower limit IMO. There are plenty of Bolts well over 100,000 miles on their first battery going strong.
 
That might be, I'll need to run the numbers to see. We'll need to wait and see just how many miles a battery is typically used before a car is junked. It could be so, but it is yet to be seen, even though there are some high-mileage EVs around, we don't know yet what the typical case will be.
That might be????? It is EXACTLY what it is!!! The 150,000 km is already nonsense as many Bolts easily reached this number without large amounts of battery failure. Maybe if we were talking passively cooled Nissan Leafs I would agree with that 150,000 km number. I still don't agree with that 1 paper that says a battery takes between 150 kg to 300 kg (1 to 2 g / kWh / km for 150,000 km of battery lifespan) to make 1 kWh of battery. The average numbers are 70 kg to 110 kg (0.47 to 0.73 g / kWh / km for 150,000 km of battery lifespan) according to many sources. But you can't make your point using average data, you need to use that 1 paper for your argument. Below is data to show that the 150,000 km value is nonsense.


I am going to do your crazy calculation comparing your old Volt to a Hyundai Ioniq BEV using your calculation. You can't deny this :p

A lithium-ion car battery has a life cycle CO2 cost of about 1.5 g CO2 / kwh / km. (1)
The Hyundai Electric has a 28 kWh battery, so the CO2 cost is ~ 1.5g CO2 / kWh * 28 kWh / km * 1 km / 0.62 mi = 67.7 g CO2 / mi. = 0.0677 kg / mi.
The Volt has a 16 kWh battery, so the CO2 cost is ~ 1.5g CO2/kWh * 16 kWh / km * 1 km / 0.62 mi = 38.7 g CO2 / mi = 0.0387 kg / mi.

The Hyundai Electric has an MPGe of 136, or 25 kWh / 100 miles.
The Volt has an MPGe of 106, or 31 kWh / 100 miles.

For Oregon, the carbon intensity of electricity is ~ 0.11 kg / kWh. (2)

Hyundai Electric CO2 / 100 miles: 25 kWh / 100 mi * 0.11 kg / kWh + 0.0677 kg / mi * 100 mi = 9.52 kg / 100 miles.

Volt CO2 /100 miles
: I'm using your typical use of 66.5% EV mode. So, the Volt will travel 66.5 miles in EV mode and 33.5 miles in hybrid mode. EV mode CO2 cost is 31 kWh / 100 miles or 20.615 kWh / 66.5 miles * 0.11 kg CO2 / kWh = 2.26 kg CO2 / 66.5 miles for the electricity. The life-cycle battery cost is 100 mi *0.0387 kg / mi =3.87 kg. Then there will be 33.5 miles of hybrid mode at 42 miles / gal. So 33.5 miles / 42 mpg = ~0.8 gallons. 1 gal = 8.9 kg CO2 (3). so 33.5 miles produces 0.8 g * 8.9 kg = 7.12 kg CO2 / 33.5 miles. Total CO2 cost of 100 miles = 2.26 kg + 3.87 kg+ 7.12 kg = 13.25 kg / 100 miles.

Please let me know what I did wrong with your calculations? It seems that the Hyundai Electric wins by a lot.
 
Another way of looking at this is that in the given scenario, an EV does worse for the first 6 years and then gains an edge over the PHEV.
The size of the battery and how it is made is the biggest factor of CO2 emissions for a BEV. I am actually a huge fan of longer range PHEV's that can get 50 miles of range that can cover over 90% of an individuals driving. With the Volt being discontinued, what is the longest range PHEV? The Prius Prime/Hyundai Ioniq both get about 25 miles of all electric range. New cars like the Subaru Crosstrek PHEV get 17 miles of range. I am not liking this new type of PHEV. I think 50 miles of all electric range should be the number for a PHEV. These new PHEV's will be treated like hybrids and over 60% of driving will be on gas. The Volt with 53 miles was the best PHEV out there and it wasn't close!
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top