Not exactly a surprise that ICE vehicles are thirstier than advertised to the tune of about 20% and much more for SUVs and larger vehicles. Something worth considering when it's claimed the latest dino juice burner will give you "xx" mpg.
My experience has been different. Driving a phev with 18kw battery and have a home charger so can fully charge it from zero to full in 2.5 hours. Living in Dublin so all my day to day driving is done on electric. I plug it in daily and the odd time would charge it twice a day if needed. Only time i use petrol is on journeys outside Dublin. I'm not yet ready for the full ev experience as this car is the main family car and is used for a reasonable amount of long journeys. I will however probably replace the second car in the family with an ev when it is being changed.
A phev works perfectly in my case as i'm willing to plug it in at home and i have a charger at home which tops it quickly. If you are not willing to do that well then its a waste of time.
In fairness it's data from insurance and AA breakdown and repairs. Because many cars these days won't just start back up if run out of fuel.
It's my habit to look to stats and news reports to double check opinions including my own. Because just because you do something one way doesn't mean everyone else does.
"...More motorists are calling the AA because they have run out of fuel. The motor rescue company has seen a 17% jump in the number of fuel-related call outs.
They have linked the increase to the high cost of petrol and diesel.
Prices rose to all time high records this summer.
Motorists also cited the lack of service stations as one of the reasons they didn't fill up - claiming they couldn't find any when they were running low..."
Certainly over the years I've seen a few people run out of fuel. It's not my habit to run a car regularly into the red, or not fill the car and only put €20 in it. But I do know people who do that. How many people are used to their partner leaving the car on fumes, and discovering last thing at night.
:)
In understand its the daily mail and "studies have shown" is gospel, but when is the last time you ever met anyone in Ireland who ran out of petrol or diesel. I think I met one person in my whole life who ran out of fuel. Maybe there are 799,999 others that i might bump into but …. daily mail says 800,000 people a year run out of fuel on the road. Must be a crisis.
only Gen1 Leafs have the Leaf-Speed function. The 40kWh can go faster…just about. 😁
But they are. Ever tried leafspeed on any road? You'd get used to tailgating and aggressive overtaking pretty quickly. Even EV drivers laugh at leafspeed😆
Matters to some ice drivers...
Thanks
That's bloody infuriating,false advertising etc etc
got my first EV about 10 years ago, but its still like owning a pet. Maybe more like owning a cat than a dog nowadays :)
I nearly wet myself laughing at that. I wouldn't put my EVs and pets in the same category. The EVs are zero emissions. The dog would knock you out with a silent one if you weren't quick enough to get out of the room.
Thats a fair point. When I had an ICE it didnt matter at all to me how far it went on how much fuel. I would just go and fill it up at the next garage i passed if i ever glanced at the needle and it was below 1/8th. And I wouldnt be too pushed when i was passing that station or if a few were closed I knew there would be another very soon. Any time in the next 100km was fine.
The EV is a different story. I need to plan long trips, opening hours, time waiting around, broken chargers, speeds of chargers. Its more like owning a pet than owning a car. With longer range now its not as bad as it was when i got my first EV about 10 years ago, but its still like owning a pet. Maybe more like owning a cat than a dog nowadays :)
I couldn't tell you what the exact max range of any of vehicles I've owned was diesel, petrol or EV was. I generally fill up when around 20% left. I don't generally test them to max range by driving at 60kph either.
If it's your habit to do long range drives (especially the max range) with minimal planning. Buy a diesel. It's not rocket science.
The report isn't into the efficiency of vehicles, the report is on the in-service gap between reported emissions and the real-world emissions of the vehicles subject to the reporting requirements.
You are calling for something else entirely and wondering why we're saying it should be in a different report.
Please out line why you think an extra column with EV = 0 has any value in the report we're discussing
As to the report being a fluff piece, why do you think data from approx. 10% of in-serivce vehicles presented statistically is incorrect, have you access to a larger dataset than the commission and can show that what they are presenting is incorrect?
Maybe having a taxation system based on metrics that can't easily be determined with accuracy is an inherently stupid idea.
You should probably read what Liam is writing rather than rely on the headline narrative in your own head.
No and that was my point. The report is a fluff piece which paints anything with an engine in it in a bad light. The report excludes EVs which this same testing is applied. They know most won't read the report and just see headlines that state ICE is bad when in fact its the testing which is flawed. Liam appears to be of the opinion that you can't measure the efficiency of an EV because it doesn't have an exhaust pipe and therefore should not be included in the report..
The report titled as below, which is to analyse the gap between rated emissions and real world emissions?
Commission report under Article 12(3) of Regulation (EU) 2019/631 on the evolution of the real-world CO2 emissions gap for passenger cars and light commercial vehicles and containing the anonymised and aggregated real-world datasets referred to in Article 12 of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/392
Would be a waste of everybody's time to obtain the data from an EV and go yep, still zero. The report is looking at the vehicle performance, not the end-to-end chain. There are plenty of other EU reports on energy generation and other commercial CO2 emissions.
Did you read in the report anything to do with EV efficiency, or are you talking about what the media said about the report? @liamog wasn't talking about media commentary. He was talking about the report. The media tend to be less educated on EV related topics than the average motor forum user, so I wouldn't hold in high esteem what a journo says about EV efficiency.
EV range is a problem for some people. It's not and never has been an issue for me, even when I was driving a 24kWh Leaf with a 1 week exception when I had to travel up north every day for a week long training program. I had to charge the car not long after starting my journey home, or before I would charge before going to training class if I was running early.
I charge at home, plugging in every few days. I don't wait for my car to charge, it charges while I sleep. No need to deviate to go to a forecourt for petrol/diesel. When I need to go somewhere further, with a bigger battery, I don't even give it a second thought. After driving for a couple of hours, I pull over for a break, a slash and maybe a tea/coffee. I might charge while there and I might not. Anyone who has got a new EV in the last 5 years I expect would be similar to this, with maybe some charging, or topping up nightly.
Older, first gen cars are different. They are mainly local run-abouts, or commuter cars within reasonable distance. This is what I used my Leafs for. As long as people know the limitations, it's not a problem unless circumstances change and more range is needed, as happened with me when I changed career and job location.
Nobody checks the range on an ICE because as you have rightly pointed out, they have many more refueling points and are quickly refueled at those points…for a heftier price of course. What they don't consider is the loss in efficiency from are and carbon build-up. This can have the same impact as a degraded battery, but most won't even notice. Some will notice their car is thirsty, but most won't. They just shove the fuel into the car and get shafted at the till without thinking why it costs so much to keep their engine chugging away.
My OP was not ICE bashing. It was poking fun at the folks who bang on about EV range and WLTP figures. Glass houses indeed.
The emissions is only one aspect of the report, it also deals with efficiency. The report indicates that the testing methodology used to measure fuel consumption in ICE vehicles is about 20% off real world values. Reading the media blurbs related to the reports you would think this inaccuracy relates to ICE vehicles only when in fact the exact same testing methodology is applied to EVs. Its believed that there is a greater than 20% variance in EV WLTP data vs real world data as WLTP doesn't take into account the massive drop off in EV efficiency during winter months. There are massive efforts being taken to avoid any EV negativity in order to boost sales when they really should be honest with the public on what they should expect from EVs.
The WLTP is applied to EVs also and its quite telling that EV data has not been complied and reported in this report as a comparison.
Real world monitoring of tailpipe emissions from an EV would be quite a redundant data point to include in the analysis. What would be the value of statistic that has a guaranteed zero value. There should also be a report on real world EV efficiency to help inform consumers, but it would be a separate analysis to this
The EU wants more EVs on the road which is commendable but lets not forget that just over a decade ago the EU were publishing reports that showed the benefits to the environment of driving a diesel we all know how that ended up.
It ended up with a reduction in CO2 emissions but an increase in other local pollutants such NOX and PM2.5. There was an international conspiracy amongst automakers to hide the non-CO2 emissions and a number of manufacturers paid significant fines when it was found by regulators. It led to new emissions standards including the one that requires this real-world reporting instead of relying just on test results.
Oh look, another visitor.
I opened this thread as a laugh because EV haters often point to claimed ranges being less than real world examples. Any knuckle-head knows the same is true of ICE cars, but we don't see it often in the news.
People point out claimed ranges being less for EV's than others because its a bigger problem for EV's:
EV ranges are much shorter to begin with. So you will have to "refill" more often. When you do have to refill, you have to wait for longer. And you have less options of where you can refill, so you have to put more consideration into where you can do it.
Because of this, along with price, range is probably the biggest factor consumers place on EV's when you buy them. Hell, even when you buy second hand you check what the depreciation in range has been since it was new. Who checks what the depreciation in range is for ICE cars when they buy an older one? No one, because whatever it is, its still more than enough for their needs.
EV's get a lot of undeserved bashing because people are reluctant to change and look for reasons not to change. EV's have advantages over ICE, but bashing ICE's over their claimed ranges is throwing stones in glass houses.
In the graph you referenced the WLTP figure for PHEVs is probably more accurate than the real world figures listed if the PHEV was used as designed. A lot of data in this report was collected using fleet vehicles, when somebody else is paying for the fuel you tend not to be as worried about consumption plus its more difficult to expense home charging.
"This confirms that these vehicles are currently not realizing their potential, in particular as they are not being charged and driven fully electrically as frequently as assumed. To better reflect the real-world situation, the Commission has already introduced changes to the calculation used for the official test procedure, which will apply as of 2025, and may need to be further adjusted based on real-world data."
The WLTP is applied to EVs also and its quite telling that EV data has not been complied and reported in this report as a comparison. The WLTP is a lab test and the results attained while performing a WLTP test never match real world values on average it tends to be off by 20% which match the results in the graph. The previous standardized test "NEDC" was off by around 40%.
The EU wants more EVs on the road which is commendable but lets not forget that just over a decade ago the EU were publishing reports that showed the benefits to the environment of driving a diesel we all know how that ended up. If the EUs sole focus is the environment they would not be currently discussing measures to limit the importation of affordable cheap Chinese EVs.
There are no longer plans to prevent sales of new combustion cars from 2030 onwards. The planned end of sales of cars with any tailpipe emissions is from 2035. 11 years is a long time to roll out solutions that have already been tested in jurisdictions that are further ahead on the transition curve.
The same metric doesn't apply to both.
Especially in the lower price range where you can get an ICE car for <5k that will have a range of 700-800 Kms.
Obviously range is not an issue there.
You can buy an EV for<5k too that will knock the socks off the ICE for running costs but won't have the range.
Matter of choice.
Most ice cars dont come near their claimed MPG. Most EV dont get near the range the claim. This is to many differnet factors. For the Joe Soap driver the biggest issue between them is the convience of refueling against charging especially if you dont have a home charger and need to use a public charger. Until everyone can charge at home charging prices driveway or not EV ownership will not take off. So if the Governemnt want to have an EV only new car sales from 2030 they are going to have to approve individual chargers for apartment owners and arm style chargers for houses with no driveways along with a proper nationwide public charging system. That will end range anxiety. Its then upto EV manufacturers to price their cars competitively and with battery development i see minimum 500km range for all cars in the near future.
Good then it's not an EV owners job to convince anyone of the merits or otherwise of owning an EV.
Japanese are more honest:-)
please don't go phev.
I find it funny that the real emissions on the phev are better or on a par with the petrol or diesel cars wltp , I would like to see the results with the latest crop of 18 kwh+ phevs, anyway it could be skewed by BIK drivers, cheaper to drive than to actually use properly.
Used properly they have a place, I think the data shows that most drivers aren't using them properly.
