Has anyone figured out the Electric/Gas $ break even point for the Clarity?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mark W
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 50
  • Views Views 11K
In Canada, I don't think break even is even on the table. My gas savings after changing from a minivan to the Clarity pretty much pay for the car payments. My electric bill has gone up about $30/month, and almost running exclusively electric.

The numbers :
5.91cents kwH , $1.20/litre (4.50+/gallon)
 
Claritydfw said:
Out of curiosity did your calculation account for any power loss during charging?
Click to expand...

marshall said:
The government uses the 31KWh/100 miles number and it looks like they do include the losses and the test procedure.

https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=39782&id=39918
https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/pdfs/EPA test procedure for EVs-PHEVs-11-14-2017.pdf
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree that this number is power into the vehicle, miles out (losses included). Of course, the break-even is entirely dependent on what you assume for these numbers (the 31 kWh / 100 mi, and the 45 MPG in HV). Obviously individuals drive differently and conditions vary. Personally, I have found that my actual experience has been very close to these assumptions. Certainly close enough to get a very good idea as to 'Break-even'
 
When I look at what a battery fill-up is from empty (mine average 13.72 kWh) I traveled as few as 31.9 miles when the temps were 11 degrees F to 58 miles in summer. So much of the calculation depends on weather, summer range. So just use the formula izudin posted and you can figure out your break even which will change by season mostly based on your EV miles and of course the moving cost of gasoline. Some really good posts here thanks all.
 
If anybody interested I can send them an Excel file to play with the numbers.

GasVsElectricity.jpg
 
Last edited:
Thanks all for the replies. I think the two key numbers are miles/kwh, and MPG. According to Marshall's numbers, those are 3.225 miles/kwh, and 45 mpg. Are those what people are really getting? I'm guessing those are numbers and moderate temperatures? If those are at moderate temperatures, then when it's 30F outside like today, I would think the the miles/kwh would be moderately lower, 2.5 maybe, and the MPG would be slightly lower, 40 mpg? If that's the case, then in frigid weather, my cost to go 100 miles in EV would be .20 x 100 /2.5 = $8.00 vs. HV 100 / 40 x 2.29 = $5.72! Is that right? I think my math may be bad here.
 
Here cute chart from about 4 years ago. Find your MPGe in the middle and see where the kWh price crossed the gas price. Really shows paying $.39/kWh at Blink is never worth it unless the alternative is walking home.

EV-to-Gas Comp Chart.webp
 
izudin said:
If anybody interested I can send them an Excel file to play with the numbers
Click to expand...

Thanks for providing the link to your spreadsheet ! It can clearly be tailored to whatever a user would like.

The numbers you used have led me to a question... When the battery is depleted (2 bars, and EV = 0), my experience has been that a full charge from this condition consistently requires 14.5 kWh. The highest amount of charge I have ever experienced is 14.66 kWh. This is more like a 15% reserve. My EV range corresponding to this charge falls anywhere from 40 to 50 miles (depending on temperature and heater use).

Have you actually experienced charges as high as 15.3 kWh?
How about others? Are others getting 14.5 kWh for a 'full' charge, or different?
 
MrFixit said:
Thanks for providing the link to your spreadsheet ! It can clearly be tailored to whatever a user would like.

The numbers you used have led me to a question... When the battery is depleted (2 bars, and EV = 0), my experience has been that a full charge from this condition consistently requires 14.5 kWh. The highest amount of charge I have ever experienced is 14.66 kWh. This is more like a 15% reserve. My EV range corresponding to this charge falls anywhere from 40 to 50 miles (depending on temperature and heater use).

Have you actually experienced charges as high as 15.3 kWh?
How about others? Are others getting 14.5 kWh for a 'full' charge, or different?
Click to expand...

I have measured twice as 15+ kWh for full charge ( from 2 bars EV=0) using level1 Honda cahrger.


Sent from my iPhone using Inside EVs
 
MrFixit said:
Thanks for providing the link to your spreadsheet ! It can clearly be tailored to whatever a user would like.

The numbers you used have led me to a question... When the battery is depleted (2 bars, and EV = 0), my experience has been that a full charge from this condition consistently requires 14.5 kWh. The highest amount of charge I have ever experienced is 14.66 kWh. This is more like a 15% reserve. My EV range corresponding to this charge falls anywhere from 40 to 50 miles (depending on temperature and heater use).

Have you actually experienced charges as high as 15.3 kWh?
How about others? Are others getting 14.5 kWh for a 'full' charge, or different?
Click to expand...

I have the car for less than a month (a little over 1000miles) and only once had battery depleted to 2 bars. HondaLink showed battery SOC at 9%, and to charge it to 100% took 15.5Kwh (as measured with KillAWatt).
 
izudin said:
I have the car for less than a month (a little over 1000miles) and only once had battery depleted to 2 bars. HondaLink showed battery SOC at 9%, and to charge it to 100% took 15.5Kwh (as measured with KillAWatt).
Click to expand...

Interesting... My charger is a L2 JuiceBox, and it reports energy usage. Anything has a measurement tolerance of course... The JuiceBox could be 'off'. It is also possible that the vehicle can accept a little more energy with the slower L1 charge rate. Maybe I will try a KillAWatt run with the factory charger for comparison.
 
Frankly I think all these methods miss an important point, which is that battery degradation is not factored in.

At 80,000 miles, the batteries will likely only be running at 70% capacity and once they fall below 70%, it is likely that cells will start to get close to failing.

This means that the true cost per mile would have to include the loss of capacity on the battery.

Here is an example of how that works. A friend of mine bought a Nissan Leaf about 7 years ago and the pack was so bad that her mileage was half, and then she started to get error codes. Since the batteries were going bad, their choice was to just sell the car really cheap and let the new owner put in new batteries, or put new batteries in it. The car was in pretty good shape otherwise, but they elected to sell it and only got $5000. A new pack, installed, would be $6500.

So, any cost estimate that does not include battery depletion is not really capturing the true cost, which is going to show up at re-sale time. A car with a worn out pack is going to be worthless.
 
Eddgie said:
Frankly I think all these methods miss an important point, which is that battery degradation is not factored in
Click to expand...

This thread was never intended (as I see it) to address the life-cycle cost of the vehicle...
But, rather, to answer a much simpler question about which fuel is more cost-effective at a given point in time (electric or gas).

As time goes on, if you feel there is a degradation to the battery, you can still use the same methodology to look at whether the battery degradation [at whatever point in the future] is enough to tip the scales with the fuel break-even analysis just by changing the "kWh per 100 mile" parameter accordingly.

Total life-cycle is quite a different analysis... I totally agree that this vehicle is likely to have little re-sale value. I don't believe the biggest reason will be battery degradation however. The fundamental reason for loss of value is simply the fact that this is a highly technical vehicle, and technical obsolescence will kick in (just like it does with computers and cell phones). Nobody will want it because there will be FAR more advanced options available.
 
Eddgie said:
Frankly I think all these methods miss an important point, which is that battery degradation is not factored in.

At 80,000 miles, the batteries will likely only be running at 70% capacity and once they fall below 70%, it is likely that cells will start to get close to failing.

This means that the true cost per mile would have to include the loss of capacity on the battery.

Here is an example of how that works. A friend of mine bought a Nissan Leaf about 7 years ago and the pack was so bad that her mileage was half, and then she started to get error codes. Since the batteries were going bad, their choice was to just sell the car really cheap and let the new owner put in new batteries, or put new batteries in it. The car was in pretty good shape otherwise, but they elected to sell it and only got $5000. A new pack, installed, would be $6500.

So, any cost estimate that does not include battery depletion is not really capturing the true cost, which is going to show up at re-sale time. A car with a worn out pack is going to be worthless.
Click to expand...
We had two Prius cars. The 2008 is now in the hands of my son. It is just about to turn 200,000 miles and, while it's hard to measure in a hybrid, we haven't noticed any battery degradation.

While I do expect some battery change I don't believe it will be 70% after 80K miles.
 
I think it bears mentioning that HV mode for short trips around town (think: 5 miles or less, 40 mph or less) will be nowhere near the low 40's in mpg. That initial engine warm up takes a disproportionate amount of gasoline, just to get the engine up to temperature.
Electric motor operation on the other hand is much less affected by short trips and actually benefits from the lower speeds.

If I were facing the CT situation I'd still use the car electrically for surface streets and HV for highways.
 
Eddgie said:
Frankly I think all these methods miss an important point, which is that battery degradation is not factored in.

At 80,000 miles, the batteries will likely only be running at 70% capacity and once they fall below 70%, it is likely that cells will start to get close to failing.

This means that the true cost per mile would have to include the loss of capacity on the battery.

Here is an example of how that works. A friend of mine bought a Nissan Leaf about 7 years ago and the pack was so bad that her mileage was half, and then she started to get error codes. Since the batteries were going bad, their choice was to just sell the car really cheap and let the new owner put in new batteries, or put new batteries in it. The car was in pretty good shape otherwise, but they elected to sell it and only got $5000. A new pack, installed, would be $6500.

So, any cost estimate that does not include battery depletion is not really capturing the true cost, which is going to show up at re-sale time. A car with a worn out pack is going to be worthless.
Click to expand...
The Nissan Leaf is a different animal, with its inferior battery temperature management.
The Chevrolet Volt is very similar to the Clarity in this respect and there has been very little range degradation in the first 100,000 miles experienced by most owners, even in hot climates.
My 2013 Volt has over 60,000 miles and the range is easily within 5% of the original. Tire selection and inflation has a bigger impact than the accumulated battery condition so far.
 
Last edited:
jdonalds said:
We had two Prius cars. The 2008 is now in the hands of my son. It is just about to turn 200,000 miles and, while it's hard to measure in a hybrid, we haven't noticed any battery degradation.

While I do expect some battery change I don't believe it will be 70% after 80K miles.
Click to expand...
A 2008 Prius uses a nickel metal hydride battery, not lithium ion like the Clarity. NMH does not degrade as fast as LI, nor does it provide anywhere near the same power to weight ratio.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top