Volvo XC40 Forum banner
1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Registered
2015 X1, 2017 BRZ
Joined
·
209 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
The last part is especially important. In the analysis with the US average energy mix (where I live), 24 tones of CO2 are produced to power the C40, which is less than a 50% savings over traditional ICE. I’m guessing this assumes about a 50/50 split in fossil fuels vs renewable for energy production. But with 100% renewable, this comes down to essentially zero CO2 production to power the car. That’s a huge difference.

In Tacoma WA where I live, somewhere above 90% of our electricity is renewable (mostly hydro), so the CO2 production to power the car is very minimal, making the saving compared to ICE much more significant, and the break even point happens way sooner.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
I’m guessing this assumes about a 50/50 split in fossil fuels vs renewable for energy production.
It takes some digging through the report, but they state that they use the EU-28 electricity mix from the 2017 GaBi database -- which looks like this: (Source: https://gabi.sphera.com/fileadmin/GaBi_Databases/Database_Upgrade_2017_Upgrades_and_improvements.pdf)
Colorfulness Rectangle Slope Organism Font

So eyeballing it -- the non-carbon emitting sources would be:
nuclear + hydro + wind + solar + others = ~30% + ~10% + ~5% + ~2.5% + ~2.5% = ~50%
 

·
Registered
2015 X1, 2017 BRZ
Joined
·
209 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
I thought it was a pretty interesting study. Since battery production has such a massive environmental impact, it's making me think twice about the trend of shoving bigger and bigger batteries into EVs to get better range. Some of the current and upcoming XC40/C40 competitors have greater range but also significantly larger batteries. Food for thought.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
I thought it was a pretty interesting study. Since battery production has such a massive environmental impact, it's making me think twice about the trend of shoving bigger and bigger batteries into EVs to get better range. Some of the current and upcoming XC40/C40 competitors have greater range but also significantly larger batteries. Food for thought.
100% agree. I’m fine with the range on the C40. I had looked closely at the MachE a year ago, but now feel like the 25% larger battery is an unnecessary cost.

It would be nice to see slightly higher efficiency, but the battery itself is good for my use
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
39 Posts
This thread prompted me to locate the energy generation breakdown of my local utility (which I can't find at the moment). While doing that I stumbled on this report on the cost of Solar. It says Solar will be the least expensive source of electricity nationwide by 2030. Most of the country is already there, or only a few years from reaching that goal.


Of course, a grid sourced by renewables like solar requires a storage element to be useful. The sun doesn't always shine, especially at night. But EVs, conveniently, are storage devices; so the trick is charging them when all that low-cost solar power is available. Doing that may require rethinking when, and therefore, where we charge them. Charging at home overnight seems likely to become the least optimal option.
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Top