Download the report

Abstract
The air quality impacts of replacing approximately 20% of the gasoline-powered light duty vehicle
miles traveled (VMT) with electric VMT by the year 2018 were examined for four major cities in
Texas: Dallas/Ft Worth, Houston, Austin, and San Antonio. Plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV)
charging was assumed to occur on the electric grid controlled by the Electricity Reliability Council of
Texas (ERCOT), and three charging scenarios were examined: nighttime charging, charging to
maximize battery life, and charging to maximize driver convenience. A subset of electricity generating
units (EGUs) in Texas that were found to contribute the majority of the electricity generation needed to
charge PHEVs at the times of day associated with each scenario was modeled using a regional
photochemical model (CAMx). The net impacts of the PHEVs on the emissions of precursors to the
formation of ozone included an increase in NOx emissions from EGUs during times of day when the
vehicle is charging, and a decrease in NOx from mobile emissions. The changes in maximum daily 8 h
ozone concentrations and average exposure potential at twelve air quality monitors in Texas were
predicted on the basis of these changes in NOx emissions. For all scenarios, at all monitors, the impact
of changes in vehicular emissions, rather than EGU emissions, dominated the ozone impact. In general,
PHEVs lead to an increase in ozone during nighttime hours (due to decreased scavenging from both
vehicles and EGU stacks) and a decrease in ozone during daytime hours. A few monitors showed a
larger increase in ozone for the convenience charging scenario versus the other two scenarios.
Additionally, cumulative ozone exposure results indicate that nighttime charging is most likely to
reduce a measure of ozone exposure potential versus the other two scenarios.

Read more and download here.

Abstract

Electric vehicle adoption has the potential to wean America off its current unsustainable appetite for oil, which poses a risk to the global economy, security and environment.  The goal of this research is to assess the greenhouse gas emissions impact of electric vehicle adoption on individual and in Rhode Island on a fleetwide level between 2010 and 2030. A Battery electric vehicle reduces lifetime emissions by 90 percent compared to a conventional vehicle.  Statewide emissions impact is analyzed using scenario analysis that compares a Business-As-Usual Scenario (no plug-in vehicle adoption) with a 50% Plug-in-Vehicle Adoption Scenario (50% new vehicle sales in 2030).  The plug-in vehicle scenario reduces transportation emissions by 1.36 million metric tons (MMT), or 37 percent, for 2030, and reduces emissions by 9.6 MMT, 13%, between 2010 and 2030. The extent of electric vehicle adoption in Rhode Island is dependant on reducing vehicle upfront cost, installing a comprehensive charging infrastructure (including Level III Quick Charge stations), and developing a host of policies and public awareness campaigns in order to encourage PEV adoption.  The Low Carbon Fuel Standard, and tax rebates on the upfront cost of plug-in vehicles are two policy measures that have potential to encourage plug-in vehicle adoption. The introduction of electricity as a vehicle fuel source will shift a piece of the burden of transportation emissions onto the electric sector.  Plug-in electric vehicle adoption must be examined on a regional scale in order to assess the current grid’s capacity to support electric vehicle charging.  Implementing a valley-filling approach, like off-peak and time-of-use pricing, could greatly improve the grid’s efficiency and maximize capacity. The positive greenhouse gas emissions impact should encourage policy makers, industry, and citizenry to work together to bring about plug-in electric vehicle adoption in Rhode Island.

From the report:

“The concentration of buying power associated with
fleet operators and fleet management companies represents
a significant opportunity to assist the early development
of the electric drive vehicle industry. Moreover,
fleets tend to possess a handful of important characteristics
that may make them more likely than typical
consumers to take on the potential risks of electric drive
ownership in anticipation of reaping financial benefits
down the road.”

Download volume one here.

PHEV Impact on Nationwide Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Overview of Study and Results
This report describes the first detailed, nationwide analysis of greenhouse gas (GHG) impacts of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. The “well-to-wheels” analysis accounted for emissions from the generation of electricity to charge PHEV batteries and from the production, distribution and consumption of gasoline and diesel motor fuels.

Researchers used detailed models of the U.S. electric and transportation sectors and created a series of scenarios to examine assumed changes in both sectors over the 2010 to 2050 timeframe of the study. Three scenarios represent high, medium, and low levels of both CO2 and total GHG emissions intensity for the electric sector as determined by the mix of generating technologies and other factors. Three scenarios represent high, medium, and low penetration of PHEVs in the 2010 to 2050 timeframe.
From these two sets of scenarios emerge nine different outcomes spanning the potential longterm GHG emissions impacts of PHEVs, as shown in the following table. (see PDF)

Researchers drew the following conclusions from the modeling exercises:

Annual and cumulative GHG emissions are reduced significantly across each of the nine scenario combinations. Annual GHG emissions reductions were significant in every scenario combination of the study, reaching a maximum reduction of 612 million metric tons in 2050 (High PHEV fleet penetration, Low electric sector CO2 intensity case). Cumulative GHG emissions reductions from 2010 to 2050 can range from 3.4 to 10.3 billion metric tons. Each region of the country will yield reductions in GHG emissions. More detailed results are presented below and in Chapter 5 of this report.

Electrifying Results from UK Mini E Pioneers

(PresseBox) München, 14.09.2010, As the second half of the twelve month MINI E field trial begins this week, the outcome of interviews and objective data collected from the first three months, of the December to June 2010 phase of the trial has now been analysed. The key results show that MINI and the BMW Group are gleaning valuable learning that will help shape the specification and operating characteristics of its Megacity vehicle which will make its debut in 2013.

The key findings from the first six months of the UK field trial are as follows:

-MINI E usage differs only marginally from a control group of MINI Cooper and BMW 116i drivers in terms of average journey distance, daily mileage and frequency of use.

-Before the trials began, users expected limitations in terms of range and charging times. In practice these have only proved to be barriers in a very few specific cases.

-Users felt reassured that both the MINI E itself and the charging process are completely safe.

-There was a very strong feeling from both private and fleet users that renewable energy should play an important role in future electricity generation. There was also a strong feeling that the battery of an electric vehicle (EV) should be charged using renewables to optimise the ecological advantages of an EV.

-The BMW Group is trusted to provide a technically mature solution to the challenges presented by EVs.
-Users reported a need for more interior space for journeys requiring more passengers and more storage capacity.

-Users felt strongly that public charging facilities for EVs were desirable and even essential. However, at the same time, the majority claimed that they coped without public charging facilities.

-In summary, users liked MINI E’s lack of noise, the convenience of home charging, low off peak power charges, not having to go to a petrol station and queue, driving a zero emissions vehicle, MINI E’s acceleration characteristics and regenerative braking.

-Drawbacks include current mileage range for certain journeys, limited carrying capacity and suboptimal car performance during the extremely cold weather conditions in December 2009 and January 2010.

MINI E average trip distance mirrors that of cars in the same segment

The National Travel Survey reveals that the average single trip length for car users in the UK is 8.6 miles, a distance almost exactly matched by MINI E drivers at 8.5 miles. Using the same survey data, 90 per cent of all trips are 15 miles or under, while another eight per cent are between 20 and 35 mile. Only two per cent are above 35 miles. Using a control group of MINI Cooper and BMW 116i customers these statistics are reinforced, MINI Cooper drivers averaging 7.3 miles and 116i drivers only 6.8 miles. The conclusion to be drawn from this is that there are no objective limitations on average daily use for MINI E drivers.

The same conclusions can be drawn by analysing average daily distance driven. The Office for National Statistics (ONS) confirms that 22.8 miles is the average private daily mileage across the UK. For MINI Cooper and 116i it is 27.0 and 26.1 respectively while, again, MINI E experience slots right in the middle at 26.7 miles. The conclusion is that MINI E daily driving use matches cars in a similar segment almost exactly.

Reasons for non use

Naturally not all trips could be taken in the MINI E. Reasons quoted by users for not using their MINI E were for longer journeys (89 per cent said this had occurred for them) and limited space, either for carrying shopping or because they needed more than two seats. Lack of space was quoted by 67 per cent of users for not using MINI E on odd occasions. These are characteristics that the future Megacity vehicle will address.

Charged experiences

The process of charging MINI E from the charging box supplied and fitted at users’ homes was convenient and appreciated by the MINI E pioneers. On average the cars were charged every two to three days. Two thirds of users charged their car three times a week or less while only six per cent charged daily. It is clear that users quickly adapted to charging overnight when electricity costs are cheaper and it also suited the daily routine of the drivers.

When asked whether users saw a need for a public charging infrastructure 87.5 per cent agreed that it is necessary, with only 12.5 per cent seeing no need. However 75 per cent of all users also said they could use their MINI E without a comprehensive charging infrastructure.

In summary the home charging was seen as safe and easy to operate, users easily adapted to a charging routine and most charged their MINI E overnight. Actual charging times were seen as efficient with some users becoming so happy with it they found it more convenient than having to queue up at a petrol station. Participants would like a public charging system but did not need to rely on one.

Renewable energy

All users, both fleet and private, feel that renewable energy generation should play an important role in future electricity generation. There is a similar agreement from users that it is important to charge the MINI E batteries with renewable energy with 100 per cent of fleet users and 89 per cent of private drivers holding this opinion. However, only 22 per cent of private, and 72 per cent of fleet, drivers thought that EVs should be exclusively powered by renewable energy.

The $64 million question – would they buy one?

Would this early experience of MINI E encourage the pioneers to buy an electric vehicle? The initial conclusion from the first phase of the trial is a resounding, but qualified, ‘yes’. The MINI E drivers all appreciated the use of a zeroemissions car that removed emissions from their immediate environment, the reduced reliance on fossil fuels and the lower noise pollution inherent with an EV. They also appreciated the dynamic acceleration characteristics of MINI E and its regenerative braking performance.

There are, of course, barriers to a possible future purchase. Both the current driving range and the carrying capacity for passengers and cargo are viewed as limiting factors. Also, the suboptimal performance of the car in very cold weather needs improvement.

On balance, though, all were convinced about the viability of electric vehicles in an everyday UK road environment and to a man, and woman, all claimed that taking part in this study had increased their enthusiasm to buy an EV as well as reducing the time frame in which they plan to do so.

There is the small question of price as well. Like all drivers their purchase intentions are pricesensitive. However almost half of the users stated that they would pay one third more than a conventional MINI in order to benefit from the advantages of a more sustainable form of personal mobility. This implies a UK acceptable price of around £16,000. The strength of purchase intention would be increased with improvements to luggage and passenger space.

” The early learning from this first stage of the MINI E trials has given us very positive feedback and pointers as to where we will need to improve” explained Jochen Goller, Director of MINI UK. “One has to remember that MINI E, despite being very thoroughly engineered for its task, is in the end a modified existing production MINI Hatch. An EV designed from the ground up will be able to address some of the criticism on packaging and driving range. That is precisely the reason we are holding these trials.”

“We are very confident that the full 12 month trial under real road conditions with real people will help us greatly in producing an exciting and extremely efficient vehicle for the urban environments of the future” Goller continued. “We are truly grateful to the 80 pioneers who are helping to shape the future of the sustainable electric car. They are people who care about the future of our planet as much as they do about the mobility of its inhabitants” he concluded.

Iain Gray, Chief Executive of The Technology Strategy Board said,

“We created the Low Carbon Vehicle Demonstrator competition to act as a catalyst for industry, the public sector and academia to come together to create low emission vehicles and provide solutions to powering them. Many trials have already begun and it is planned that within the next six months around 340 vehicles will be on the UK’s roads. The majority of the vehicles are electric, with a small number being plugin petrol/electric hybrids. The information gained from this project will make an important contribution to the future plans of manufacturers and their partners, to develop low carbon vehicles for the mass market.”

The future is Megacity

BMW Group’s strategy to meet the needs for a sustainable future has four strands. Today, there are exceptionally efficient internal combustion engines, both diesel and petrolpowered, which are now being joined by hybrid technology taking an initial step towards the electrification of the driveline. The next step is a fully electric vehicle which will be available for customers in 2013. The Megacity Vehicle (MCV) combines all of BMW Group’s expertise in lightweight engineering, electric drive technology and dynamic driving characteristics in one unique, groundbreaking vehicle.

BMW engineers are developing a revolutionary LifeDrive concept that comprises a completely new vehicle architecture adapted to the demands of future sustainable mobility. The entire powertrain, the electric motor, power electronics and the battery system, are all being developed in house. LifeDrive consists of two horizontally separated, independent modules. The Drive module integrates the battery, drive system and structural and crash functions into a single construction within the chassis. Its partner, the Life module, consists primarily of a highstrength and extremely lightweight passenger cell made from Carbon Fibre Reinforced Plastics (CFRP). Furthermore, the new vehicle architecture opens the door to totally new production processes which are both simpler and more flexible, and use less energy.

Carbon fibre bodywork not only provides immense strength but is also extremely light. Using this form of construction will reduce car weight by 250 to 350kgs which in turn will offset almost all the extra weight created by the batteries. The Megacity will be the first volumeproduced automobile to employ the significant benefits afforded by carbon technology.

The MINI E field trial is informing the design and development process for Megacity which will provide a practical, efficient and sustainable answer to the demand for zeroemissions urban mobility.

Notes to editors.

1.The MINI E is a two seat development of the familiar MINI Hatch. It is powered by a 204hp electric motor that also generates 220 Nm of torque. It is driven by battery power in the form of a sophisticated 35 kWh Lithium-Ion battery containing 5,088 cells. The battery can be charged by a special home charger supplied by consortium partner Scottish and Southern Energy. This enables a charge time of 2.4 hours at 50 amps. The MINI E has a top speed of 95mph and an official range of 149 miles (according to FTP72 standards), although a realistic range is 112miles.

1.The UK field trials mirror those taking place concurrently on the East and West coasts of the USA and in both Munich and Berlin. In the UK 40 examples of the MINI E have been operating for six months from late December 2009 until June 2010, 20 being private individuals and the balance with Corporate customers. The 40 MINI E Pioneers were selected from applicants in the South East of England. They are predominantly highlyeducated males aged 35 and over, earning above average income and with a high level of interest in ecological issues. A second group of 40 take the MINI Es over in September 2010 and will run the cars in normal road conditions until March 2011.

1.This research information covers only the first three months with the first tranche of MINI E Pioneers.

1.The UK Consortium supporting the MINI E trials are Scottish and Southern Energy who supply the home charging technology and renewable energy, Oxford Brookes University who are analysing data from users, SEEDA who provide political support and advice and, of course, the BMW Group which supplies the MINI E, selects users and manages driver education.

Über BMW Group

The BMW Group is one of the most successful manufacturers of automobiles and motorcycles in the world with its BMW, MINI and Rolls-Royce brands. As a global company, the BMW Group operates 24 production facilities in 13 countries and has a global sales network in more than 140 countries.

The BMW Group achieved a global sales volume of approximately 1.29 million automobiles and over 87,000 motorcycles for the 2009 financial year. The pretax profit for 2009 was euro 413 million, revenues totalled euro 50.68 billion. At 31 December 2009, the company employed a global workforce of approximately 96,000 associates.

The success of the BMW Group has always been built on longterm thinking and responsible action. The company has therefore established ecological and social sustainability throughout the value chain, comprehensive product responsibility and a clear commitment to conserving resources as an integral part of its strategy. As a result of its efforts, the BMW Group has been ranked industry leader in the Dow Jones Sustainability Indexes for the last five years.

Key Findings:

• Voters See Electric Cars As A Critical, Transformative Step Forward
• Americans Believe Electric Cars Will Reduce Pollution And Dependence On Foreign Oil, While Creating Jobs
• Voters Support A Proposal To Electrify Transportation With Support Increasing As They Learn More
• Voters Overwhelmingly Prefer A Candidate Who Supports The Proposal And Ascribe A Range Of Positive Attributes To Them
• The Most Compelling Arguments Focus On Reducing Air Pollution & Reliance On Middle East Oil, As Well As On Keeping Jobs From Going To China
• Interfering With The Free Market And Increased Spending Are The Most Persuasive Opposition Messages, But Less Compelling Than Arguments In Favor

The Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards are in the Code of Federal Regulations. Go to http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html

Scroll down to title 49, Transportation and select the Oct 2008 volume.

Then select the 500 – 599 subpart, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and then select part 571.

FMVSS 305 is the standard specific to shock prevention, battery retention and electrolyte spillage. It references some of the other standards as well.

NHTSA was petitioned by the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers to amend this standard to accommodate fuel cell vehicles, and you can read about that in the docket. Some of these changes would also effect battery EV’s. Go to www.regulations.gov and in the box, “Enter a Key word or ID”, type in NHTSA-2007-28517. Then click on “open docket folder”. The notice of proposed rulemaking is on page 3. Go to this docket to see the progress of this rulemaking action.

The EMS division worked several years ago on some first responder training with DOE, but if so the materials would be very old. We generally just ask the manufacturers for their guides. They are available at http://www.extrication.com/ERG.htm.

NHTSA crash tests online at http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/portal/site/nhtsa/menuitem.8027fe7cfb6e727568d07a30343c44cc/.

If for any reason you want to look up crash test results/video/reports on any hybrids you can find them there. We have some very old reports on EV’s, for example, the EV1 is test 2898. The easiest way to query the database is “Query by vehicle parameters such as make, model, and year.”

Also, we received this additional safety information from NREL…

Seems like the details of safety would have to be addressed by the OEMs – for example, Prius has emergency response guidelines: https://techinfo.toyota.com/techInfoPortal/staticcontent/en/techinfo/html/prelogin/docs/2ndprius.pdf

Emergency Response Guides for Hybrid Vehicles: http://www.ct.gov/cfpc/cwp/view.asp?Q=445610&A=832&cfpcPNavCtr=|30654|

GM Emergency Responder Hybrid Resources: http://www.extrication.com/ERG.htm#GM_Emergency_Responder_Hybrid_Resources

GM probably doesn’t have any EV emergency response manuals out yet but there are things like this: http://gm-volt.com/2009/08/25/chevy-volt-underwater-testing/

Abstract:

This paper examines the impact of Virginia’s policy of exempting hybrid-electric vehicles from minimum occupancy requirements on state HOV lanes. Virginia registration statistics are used to compile hybrid market shares on a county level to compare the impact of HOV lane access to other socioeconomic variables. The HOV incentive is shown to have a significant impact in Northern Virginia, but not in the Hampton Roads area. The paper also addresses the criticisms and potential unintended consequences of the incentive policy, including whether it has impacted the “green” image of the hybrid in Virginia.

Top Priorities for Overall Utility Support:

• Consumer EV Support (24/7 operator for EV charging questions).
• Residential infrastructure assistance: Fast convenient installation process that is affordable
• Outreach and leadership in readying regions for plug-in vehicles
• Compelling consumer EV rates and easy sign-up process
• Policy assistance (e.g. eased permitting, building codes, incentives)
• Expanded fleet purchases

Check it out!

The cost of Plug-in Electric Vehicles (PEVs) has been touted as ‘the 800lb gorilla in the room’ when it comes to the viable adoption of this new technology. High estimated sticker prices come as a shock to consumers, but what does the total cost of owning a PEV look like? The PGR Calculator allows you to consider the purchase cost (including financing) and the fuel cost of a PEV compared to a Prius or a regular Internal Combustion Engine vehicle over a lifetime of fifteen years. Purchase price and fuel costs are two of the biggest cost drivers, but should be taken as only an estimate of the actual lifetime cost of a vehicle. Consumers should also consider driving habits, maintenance costs, insurance, resale value, and for PEVs- potential battery and charging infrastructure costs.

For a list of companies active in the plug-in space, click here.

(NEV)- Neighborhood electric vehicle

(EREV)- Extended-range electric vehicle

(PHEV)- Plug-in hybrid electric vehicle

(EV)- Electric vehicle

Available now
BMW Mini-E (EV)
Columbia ParCar Mega (NEV)
Chrysler Global Electric Motorcars (NEV)
Miles Electric ZX40 (NEV)
Myers NmG (NEV)
REVAi (available in India) (EV)
Tesla Roadster (EV)
Think City (available in Norway) (EV)
ZAP Xebra (NEV)

Late 2009
Fisker Karma/Sunset (EREV)
Mitsubishi iMiEV (to be available in the U.K.) (EV)

2010
Pininfarina B0 (EV)
BYD E6 (EV)
Chevy Volt (EREV)
Daimler Smart EV (pilot testing now in the U.K.) (EV)
Ford Transit (EV)
Lightning GT (available in the U.K.) (EV)
Miles Electric XS500 (EV)
Optimal Energy Joule (EV)
Persu Mobility (only in California) (PHEV)
Saturn Vue (PHEV)
Toyota Prius Plug-in (PHEV)
Visionary Vehicles (PHEV)

2011
Ford Focus EV (EV)
Opel Ampera (EREV)
Renault ZE (EV)

2012
Bright Automotive (PHEV)
Nissan (EV)
Toyota FT-EV (EV)
Venturi Volage (only 25 to be built) (EV)
Volvo ReCharge (PHEV)