How electric cars will become affordable

The challenge for electric vehicles is how to make them affordable. Industry leaders at the Business of Plugging In conference in Detroit this week conveyed some ideas about how to put electric vehicles’ cost on par with conventional cars.

Why are they so expensive today? There are three main reasons:

• Car batteries are an emerging technology
• Automotive-grade electronic components need to be much more robust than those currently built for cell phones and other devices, therefore driving cost.
• No such parts are mass produced today, preventing economies of scale.

Many electric-car components today have to be custom made. One example cited by Tony Posawatz, the director of the Chevrolet Volt program, is the on-board charger. Posawatz says the charger cost GM two or three times what it could have, because no company mass-produces a large enough charger for the Volt’s 16-kwh battery pack--one capable of charging from both 110- and 220- volt outlets, lasting for 10 to 15 years in harsh environment including extreme hot and cold temperatures, and enduring constant vibration. Once production of the Volt and other electric cars ramps up, such chargers will become commodities (like cell-phone chargers today) and will therefore become less expensive.

But the charger is only one example. Procuring a steady supply of batteries is even more challenging. Currently, no company builds lithium batteries large enough to power a car in North America. So batteries, known as the heaviest part of an electric car, have to be transported from Korea. They have to come by ship, because they tend to get damaged by the high altitude and cold temperatures in cargo planes, which would have added even more cost anyway. Today, as automakers ramp up production, there is a lot of competition for the relatively few batteries large enough for electric cars. The Volt’s battery is said to make up about $16,000 of its estimated $40,000 price tag. That’s $1,000 per kilowatt hour. So reducing the price of the battery will be key to bringing down the price of the car. GM says its target is $250 per kwh, which would make the next generation Volt competitive with gas-powered cars.

Meanwhile, some electric-car experts at the Business of Plugging in conference observed that the Volt’s high $40,000 price may help it succeed at first. Only committed electric-car fans will buy them, and they may be more willing to endure some inconvenience as early adopters. Other business models that are being talked about are leasing programs for the batteries and a swapping program, much like turning your empty gas grill’s propane tank for a full one. Not worrying about the battery as an integral part of the car might make the transition to electric cars more palatable. Government subsidies, meant to encourage EV use are already in plan in Israel and Denmark.

—Eric Evarts

Edited 11/2/09

Auto X Prize Finalist: West Philadelphia Hybrid X team

It doesn’t take a major automaker, or even an established company to build a credible competitor for the Automotive X Prize. It turns out, it doesn’t even need a team run by grownups.

The West Philly Hybrid X team consists of a group of inner-city high school kids who do their work as an after-hours club. This volunteer effort has many benefits to the participants, including teaching teamwork and engineering essentials. Life skills and inspiration alone would make being involved in the program worthwhile, but the high schoolers and mentors can take pride in having both entries accepted as finalists in the competition. One is an Alternative Class car that uses a diesel hybrid drivetrain installed in a widely available sports-car kit. Their Mainstream Class entry (which requires four seats, four wheels, and a 200 mile range), made a visit to New York City as part of an event to announce the 43 finalists. (Read “Automotive X Prize finalists announced.”)

Called the West Philly Hybrid X EVX Focus, the Mainstream entry is a Ford Focus converted to hybrid-electric power, using a 60-horsepower electric motor coupled to a 1,300 cc, 80-hp Harley-Davidson motorcycle engine. The electric motor is powered by a 10.2 kWh lithium-iron phosphate battery pack. The team says the Focus will maintain all its five-passenger cargo capacity and have a 13.8 cubic-foot trunk. Mileage is estimated to be 110 to 120 mpg equivalent, using gasoline and electricity. 

The team focused on using all-American technology, well, make that North American: The Focus is made in Mexico, and the Harley-Davidson engine in Wisconsin. The team has also explored having the car built locally in Philadelphia.

X Prize teams have to have a viable business plan to produce and sell 10,000 of each of their cars. The West Philly Hybrid X team plan factors buying Focus chassis as “gliders”--sans engine and transmission-- from Ford, to keep the total price under $20,000.

Regardless of the final results from the Auto X Prize to be determined next year, clearly the West Philly team is made up of winners.

Learn more about the Automotive X Prize competition. And find out more about driving green in the Consumer Reports special fuel economy section.

—Eric Evarts with Jeff Bartlett 

Fisker announces fuel economy for Karma plug-in hybrid – without much hype

 
Measuring fuel consumption in the upcoming generation of plug-in hybrid cars is not a straightforward process, as we’ve said before. Depending on the driving cycle and how often they’re recharged with electricity, their miles per gallon can range to infinity.
 
But such claims sound preposterous and may only damage automakers credibility, such marketing campaign in which  General Motors the upcoming Chevrolet Volt.
 
So it’s refreshing to see an emerging automaker make a more realistic claim, based on a standard set by the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE). Fisker Automotive, which plans to  introduce the Karma  plug-in hybrid electric sedan next year, says the car will get 67 mpg based on the SAE test. (GM says its tests of the Volt were based on a new Environmental Protection Agency standard that has not been made public. However, government sources have told us the new EPA standard is based on the same SAE standard cited by Fisker.)
 
In price, the Fisker Karma is likely to compete with cars like the Mercedes-Benz S-Class and Lexus LS 600h. At Fisker’s claimed 67 mpg, the Karma would achieve a 75 percent reduction in fuel consumption and CO2 emissions compared with those cars. And it would be cleaner and more efficient than today’s best hybrids.
 
Like the Volt, the Karma’s fuel economy will depend entirely on how often it is recharged electrically and how it is driven.
 
Fisker also released some other detailed specifications for the Karma: It will have a 22 kwh battery capable of taking the car 50 miles on electricity between recharges. (A turbocharged 2.2-liter gasoline engine will kick in for longer trips.) The battery pack will produce 200 kw (about 268 hp). Fisker calls electric mode Stealth. Combining the engine and the electric motor (in Sport mode) yields a total of 403 horsepower.
 
All these numbers sound impressive. But we’ll have to wait until the Karma goes on sale to verify their accuracy. At least they don’t seem as wildly out of reach as those of GM.
 
-- Eric Evarts 

Tested: Speed vs fuel economy

We all seem to be in a rush these days. Life’s time demands seem to only increase, with the delicate balance of work, family, and recreation pressuring us to maximize every minute. As a result, there is real temptation to edge beyond the speed limit to shave seconds off each mile. But while driving fast may get you there sooner, there are some real downsides, such as diminished safety for yourself and fellow motorists; risk of a speeding ticket; and decreased fuel economy.

To quantify the impact a heavy right foot can have on your wallet, Consumer Reports recently conducted a seven-vehicle test comparing the fuel economy of each at speeds of 55, 65, and 75 mph. The results show the faster you drive, the more fuel you burn—no surprise there. But the most significant change in fuel economy comes from the most fuel-efficient vehicles we tested.

The Honda Insight hybrid showed the largest drop in fuel economy—over 15 mpg going from 55 to 75 mph. The Toyota Camry returned 40.3 mpg at 55 mph, but that reduces to almost 35 mpg when the speed moves up to 65 mph and drops to almost 30 mpg when speeds reach 75 mph. That’s a drop of about 5 mpg for every 10 miles over 55. Vehicles with lower fuel efficiency had the smallest drop. The V8-powered Mercury Mountaineer has a fuel economy of 23.8 mpg at 55 mph and that drops to 21.2 mpg at 65 and 17.8 at 75 mph. See the chart below for more details on all the vehicles tested.

Make & model	55 mph	65 mph	75 mph
Acura TSX 2.4-liter 4-cyl.	39.9 mpg	35.5 mpg	30.7 mpg
Honda Insight 1.3-liter 4-cyl.	51.9	44.8	36.5
Lexus RX350 3.5-liter V6	30.9	27.4	23.0
Mercury Mountaineer 4.6-liter V8	23.8	21.2	17.8
Toyota Camry 2.5-liter 4-cyl.	40.3	34.9	29.8
Toyota RAV4 2.5 liter 4-cyl.	34.6	29.3	25.9
Toyota Yaris 1.5-liter 4-cyl.	42.5	37.9	34.0

In this economy, saving money is important. But it’s not that simple. As the adage goes, time is money and it can sometimes be worth spending more to get somewhere faster. Another consideration is traffic. There is debate as to whether driving slightly over the speed limit is more dangerous than going slower. Some say it is the difference in speed of vehicles that contributes to accidents—not speeding—and that it’s best to move with the flow traffic.

What do you think? Are speeders or slow drivers the cause of accidents? Would you be willing to drive slower to save a few bucks and reduce national fuel consumption? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below.

See our guide to fuel economy for more on saving gas and alternative fuels.

—Liza Barth  

Is the mpg claim still relevant?

In light of General Motors recent claim of 230 mpg for the fuel economy of the upcoming gas/electric Chevrolet Volt, Consumer Reports and the X PRIZE Foundation, sponsor of the Progressive Automotive X PRIZE for vehicles that achieve 100 mpg, think a more inclusive, technology-neutral measurement needs to be devised. Many teams competing for the Automotive X PRIZE have entered cars that run on electricity, fuel other than gasoline, or a combination of power sources. The competition aims to award a $10 million prize for creating a car that gets 100 mpg; can be mass produced; and could be sold for an affordable price.

The mpg designation is the American standard of measuring gasoline, but for other energy sources, we believe a more neutral measure needs to be considered. The Automotive X PRIZE will rely on a measurement it calls miles per gallon equivalent (MPGe).

MPGe will use a formula to convert the use of heat energy into the equivalent of burning a gallon of gasoline. It will calculate the energy the cars use attributable to all sources used to propel the car.

The Chevrolet Volt electric vehicle has impressive technology and we look forward to testing the fuel economy, but GM says the 230 mpg claims were made using a new draft test protocol for testing the fuel economy of plug-in hybrid vehicles. However, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has not published a protocol and is still working on the development of a test for these vehicles. We hope that manufacturers and the government will endorse MPGe as a new standard to help consumers make equal comparisons as more alterative-fuel vehicles hit the market.

For more on the Autotomotive X PRIZE competition, see our blog coverage. Also, check out our guide to fuel economy for more on saving fuel and alterative fuels.

—Liza Barth 

EPA grants California CO2 emissions waiver

After a five-year legal battle, the Environmental Protection Agency yesterday granted California permission to set the nation’s first greenhouse-gas emissions standards for cars. This paves the way for as many as 15 other states that have endorsed California’s proposal to follow suit.

The state’s victory is mostly symbolic at this point, because it already agreed to follow new federal regulations through 2015. But it provides a final resolution to years of legal wrangling over CO2 limits on tailpipe emissions.

Since cars emit carbon dioxide in direct proportion to their fuel consumption, the issue had been mired in dozens of lawsuits and countersuits among automakers, the various states, the EPA, and non-profit environmental organizations over whether the rule was an emissions or a fuel economy regulation, whether it was practical, and who had the right to enforce it. This action ends the long saga.

Under the 1968 Clean Air Act, California is allowed to set its tougher emissions standards than the rest of the country, but it can’t set fuel economy standards. Other states are allowed to sign on to the California standard or the national standard, but only with the permission, or “waiver” from the EPA. So 15 other states, including Massachusetts, Vermont, Maine, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Washington, and Arizona, which had signed on to the California standard were waiting for the ruling.

In May, EPA administrator Lisa Jackson put the issue to rest by passing the first national carbon dioxide emissions standard for cars, modeled after the California standard. The national CO2 limits would effectively require cars to average 35.5 mpg by 2015. In return, California agreed not to pass its own rules until after 2015.

This new ruling will allow California to again take the environmental lead after 2016.

The state’s original standards, which started the flurry of lawsuits, calls for CO2 limits that would require cars to average almost 40 mpg by 2020.

—Eric Evarts

Earth Day: Making greener automotive choices

In the automotive world there are a number of ways to make greener choices. The most notable is to drive a more fuel-efficient car or SUV. Manual transmission vehicles can also save gas and money, although finding models with manual shifts gets tougher everyday--they simply don’t sell in the numbers they used to.

Hybrid vehicles typically deliver the highest fuel economy numbers in their class and there are a number of new models hitting the market, including the new 2010 Toyota Prius, which the company expects to get 51 mpg in the city and 48 mpg on the highway, the Honda Insight, (40 mpg city/43 mpg highway), and the Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan, which both have an EPA estimated 41 mpg city/36 mpg highway. We have not yet run our own real world fuel economy tests in these vehicles to confirm these numbers, however. To see how Consumer Reports tests fuel economy, see our video. Compare fuel economy on all vehicles tested with our new car selector.

Other alternate fuel vehicles racing to the market include plug-in hybrids such as the upcoming Chevrolet Volt and a number of electric vehicles.

Besides buying a new vehicle, how you drive your current car can also help save gas by avoiding unnecessary drag, driving smoothly, and at moderate speeds. Car pooling and taking mass transit are other options.

For more suggestions on how to live more green, visit Consumer Union's Web site Greenerchoices.org and our Earth Day special section. For more tips on saving fuel and alternative fuels, see our Green car guide.

—Liza Barth

EPA declares CO2 harmful

In a letter to the White House, the Environmental Protection Agency has declared CO2 a danger to public welfare. This represents the next step in the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions that come from motor vehicles, power plants, factories, as well as certain home products. The so-called “endangerment finding” that CO2 is harmful is currently under review in the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). If it approves the finding, CO2 could be regulated under the Clean Air Act as stipulated by the Supreme Court in 2007. The Obama administration has noted that saving energy and reducing global warming emissions are key priorities, and it has included a new “cap and trade” regime to do so in the budget it submitted to Congress. And the EPA has proposed a “CO2 registry,” to track greenhouse gas emissions, a precursor to implementing restrictions.

This effort will have come at a huge cost to the already-ailing auto industry. According to the Energy Information Agency, transportation accounted for 28 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions in 2007. That may be conservative. A report published in 2006 by the Environmental Defense Fund found that U.S. cars and light trucks are responsible for 45 percent of the CO2 emitted by automobiles around the world. This regulation in addition to the government CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) standards for increasing the fuel efficiency of vehicles would come at a rough time for automakers currently facing the lowest annual sales rate since 1981.

--Liza Barth

2010 Toyota Prius fuel economy vs. competition

Fuel-efficient cars are poised for a showdown, with Ford and Toyota both recently announcing EPA-estimated fuel economy figures. For consumers, this means fresh, compelling choices in the small and family sedan categories. While we have not run our own tests on the Ford Fusion Hybrid and Toyota Prius, the estimated government figures can provide an interesting basis for comparison. (See the video on how we test fuel economy.)

For perspective, the chart below includes current, comparable models, again with EPA numbers. Looked at together, we can see fuel efficiency increasing in these mainstream vehicle segments making it easier to save at the pump.

Make/model	EPA City mpg	EPA Highway mpg
2010 Ford Fusion Hybrid	41	36
2010 Honda Insight	40	43
2010 Toyota Prius	50	49
2009 Honda Civic Hybrid	40	45
2009 Toyota Camry Hybrid	33	34
2009 Toyota Prius	48	45

Fuel consumption calculators

Last July, with gas prices soaring, we covered a study that showed how mpg numbers for fuel economy often mislead consumers and cause them to make poor decisions. (See our original posting, “Not all mpgs are created equal.”)

Now the Duke University professors who did the original study have published online calculators to help you see the real effect of choosing a particular car with higher or lower gas mileage. The bottom line is, high-mileage cars are a game of diminishing returns. You get more bang for your buck improving the mileage of poor performing cars than by replacing a car with good mileage with one that gets a really impressive mpg number.

Try the calculators yourself at www.mpgillusion.com. A couple of notes: You need the latest Flash player to see the calculators. And once you get there, you can’t find fuel consumption figures for ranges of less than 100 miles. Still, computing fuel consumption from mpg isn’t easy in your head. So these calculators are a good starting point to understand the effects of improving gas mileage.

You can find fuel economy test results in our New Car Selector and on individual model pages, accessed through our A-Z index or the pulldown menus on major ConsumerReports.org Cars pages.

—Eric Evarts