Do Volt drivers drive more EV miles than Leaf owners ?

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
TomT said:
Our total annual mileage is virtually the same as it was prior to the Leaf...
Mine is somewhat more because I took over a one-day-a-week carpool from my carpool partner, saving him about six dollars a week in gas for his Toyota SUV. Does that count?
 
dgpcolorado said:
Mine is somewhat more because I took over a one-day-a-week carpool from my carpool partner, saving him about six dollars a week in gas for his Toyota SUV. Does that count?
It doesn't just count, you get extra credit for decreasing emissions from someone elses vehicle.

PS Does the carpool use the Leaf or an ICE vehicle?
 
There is absolutely no question that my purchase of a 2012 LEAF has radically reduced my households use of gasoline.
The same is true for many that bought a Volt or a Prius or a LEAF.
Buying gasoline is an infrequent 3 or 4 times a year event for me now. Mostly lawnmower and weed trimmer and blower and the 2009 Altima which gets limited miles. I tried to find a cost effective electric riding lawn mower, but unfortunately they don't make one yet.
Seemed real strange to buy 2 1/2 gallons of zero Ethanol premium gasoline for my old no longer in service 1994 Taurus SHO yesterday while driving a LEAF.
I really need to scrap that. Needed gas because it was low and it decided to start dumping 1/2 gallon every five minutes through a small leak in the fuel line. Really shouldn't happen after 19 years? :? :( :cry:
 
jswilson said:
Interesting discussion here... However, from a traffic, infrastructure, cost, and environment point of view, shouldn't the goal be to limit the miles driven by our cars, should they be BEVs, PHEVs, Hybrids or ICEs? After all, the more we drive our cars, the more roads we need, the more raw materials we need, etc, etc...

You have a point, but at least here in the US, it's not a politically popular point of view. Google Jimmy Carter's "Crisis of Confidence" speech, and if you read it today, much of what he says makes a lot of sense. Things like how our thirst for oil is causing us to become less secure as a nation, and how government needs to spearhead alternative energy research.

But in 1979, that speech, and the way he implemented the things he outlined in that speech was hugely unpopular, and along with his handling of events in Iran, cost him re-election.

One thing you can say about a Leaf's limited range is that it forces you to limit your driving and do as much as you can within those constraints, especially if your local area and/or your car lack QC ability. Before I got my Leaf, it's nothing for me to put 15k/year on a car even though my commute does not require it. Even retaining my ICE as a backup/range extender, I'm driving less than I was before, because I want to avoid buying gas as much as possible.
 
evnow said:
Can you explain this statement and show what data you would use to predict what ?
Just the DOT survey. We know from that survey that in the primary age group for Leaf owners the average driver goes 11,972 miles a year. That skews too female (not enough miles) but also too young (too many miles) so call it a wash and use 12,000 miles. From the survey we can also assume that on 15% of the days the Leaf won't make the drive because of range limitations. That means the Leaf will go 10,200 miles in a year. It also means the Volt will get .15 X 40 = 6 more zero emission miles a day or 2190 miles over 365 days. Now account for the 5% of days when the Leaf gets an average of 7.5 more zero emission miles a day than the Volt (assume a linear distribution). That's .375 miles a day or 136.87 miles over 365 days. Then it's just basic arithmetic: (2190 - 137) / 10,200 = .20118 or 20%.
 
TimLee said:
The Volt is clearly an electric vehicle, until the ICE starts.
Thank you. However, since the ICE in the Volt generates electricity the Volt would still be an electric vehicle even after the ICE started. The miles, however, would not be zero emission. A battery doesn't produce electricity. It stores it. The electricity comes from somewhere, and most likely it comes from burning a fossil fuel. Admittedly burning a fossil fuel in a single location is better than burning it in many locations, but conceptually the difference between an on board generator and an off board generator is simply location.

I think you're wrong, however, in thinking that the fact you get more zero emissions from a Volt than from a Leaf is meaningless. Anything but silly, that fact has a lot of policy implications.
 
RonDawg said:
One thing you can say about a Leaf's limited range is that it forces you to limit your driving and do as much as you can within those constraints, especially if your local area and/or your car lack QC ability. Before I got my Leaf, it's nothing for me to put 15k/year on a car even though my commute does not require it. Even retaining my ICE as a backup/range extender, I'm driving less than I was before, because I want to avoid buying gas as much as possible.
Interesting. Although I don't feel "limited" by the Leaf's range in my area, I see your point. I actually find more ways to drive the Leaf over the ICE, but still I've got about 3000 mi on the ICE and about 7000 mi on the Leaf. So, 70% EV. All of the ICE miles are either to Bellingham or the landfill (which won't see my Leaf anytime soon). Given one more charging station, and those 800 mi RT trips to Bellingham would be in the Leaf as well. However, given some recent change of life issues, I don't foresee as many trips to Western WA anyway.
 
Stoaty said:
It doesn't just count, you get extra credit for decreasing emissions from someone elses vehicle.

PS Does the carpool use the Leaf or an ICE vehicle?
Yes, I am driving the LEAF for my carpool. My partner drove the first 4.5 years because he gets paid and I volunteer. I took over when I got my LEAF because my fuel cost is zero (he still drives the occasional snow day). Since he works three ten hour days a week, I lowered his commute costs by a third, which he appreciates.

On the subject of LEAF miles, I find that I am more inclined to do regular volunteer work if it is within LEAF range, since it costs me nothing to get there (for short trips of 18 miles I often bicycle if weather permits). I still do projects that require long ICE car trips on occasion, but the LEAF lowers the "activation energy" of doing volunteer work in my local area (sixty miles round trip or less). So, that means more driving miles, as opposed to fewer.
 
TimLee said:
I tried to find a cost effective electric riding lawn mower, but unfortunately they don't make one yet.

When I had over a half acre to mow when I lived in the Midwest, I had a really nice riding electric mower that used deep cycle lead-acid marine batteries and would give me an hour and a half of mowing. In the ten years that I used it, I never had to replace any batteries.

Now, I see there is this one: http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/cub-cadet-debuts-rzt-s-zero-electric-zero-turn-riding-mower-201464161.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
 
LEAFfan said:
TimLee said:
I tried to find a cost effective electric riding lawn mower, but unfortunately they don't make one yet.

When I had over a half acre to mow when I lived in the Midwest, I had a really nice riding electric mower that used deep cycle lead-acid marine batteries and would give me an hour and a half of mowing. In the ten years that I used it, I never had to replace any batteries.

Now, I see there is this one: http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/cub-cadet-debuts-rzt-s-zero-electric-zero-turn-riding-mower-201464161.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Very cool, maybe I won't have to drop off calls just because the lawn guys showed up. Please start a thread for this, lest you anger the ot police.
 
I drive 50 miles roundtrip to work, been doing that every week day since the day I got my Leaf.
 
i have moved twice and changed jobs 3 times. She has changed jobs 4 times (same two jobs twice each...ya, we a "bit" different...) since LEAF arrived.

i used to have a 8 mile RT commute then old work location burned down, so we relocated from Tumwater to Lacey changing my commute to 9.4 mile round trip. did that a while then changed work to Parkland (near Tacoma) then to West Olympia then to Tacoma (near Tacoma Mall) the latter is just an office where i only do a few hours of work a week unless there is a lot of training going on. then it might be 5-8 hours a week. the rest is on the road.

I had been averaging just under 2000 miles a month on the LEAF but realized I will zoom way past my lease limit (45,000) if I kept it up so have been bouncing back and forth with company cars, gasser, etc. Last month only did 1600 miles so did not really reduce it too much...
 
Stoaty said:
jswilson said:
Interesting discussion here... However, from a traffic, infrastructure, cost, and environment point of view, shouldn't the goal be to limit the miles driven by our cars, should they be BEVs, PHEVs, Hybrids or ICEs? After all, the more we drive our cars, the more roads we need, the more raw materials we need, etc, etc...
Agree 100%. The real metric should be whether Volt or Leaf drivers put in the least number of miles driven

Per my earlier comments;

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=14201&p=323079" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Maybe the Gov should be using the same pot of money it uses for vehicle grants to fund ways of reducing mileage covered.

The capacity and capability to run more miles merely encourages more miles used. This is the problem that ICEs have created and that EVs are looked to as a solution. I'm not saying that ways should be found to bar people from covering the leisure miles that fulfil their life comforts and social activities, far from it (though, we need to be cautious to disabuse more extreme environmentalists from exactly that view). Simply, that if there are 'easy-wins' to reduce people's mileage, then that would seem a good starting point.
 
I wish cities would start a congestion tax like London. use the tax to build mass transit, carpooling effective park and ride systems, etc. if you want to drive solo in a gasser, that is fine. and how will you be paying today Sir?
 
DaveinOlyWA said:
I wish cities would start a congestion tax like London. use the tax to build mass transit

Mass transit? You mean, sharing your personal space with other people?

Sitting for an hour with some smelly person standing and presenting their backside 6 inches from your face for an hour, twice a day, every day (if you're lucky enough to sit down!!)?

32768_1.jpg

{from; "Girl, 7, blacks out on crammed ‘cattle’ train" - http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/32768/Girl-7-blacks-out-on-crammed-cattle-train" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; }

Yeeurgh!

How about just planning cities, and modern living & working space, better to avoid long commuter travelling altogether?
 
donald said:
DaveinOlyWA said:
I wish cities would start a congestion tax like London. use the tax to build mass transit

Mass transit? You mean, sharing your personal space with other people?

Sitting for an hour with some smelly person standing and presenting their backside 6 inches from your face for an hour, twice a day, every day (if you're lucky enough to sit down!!)?

32768_1.jpg

{from; "Girl, 7, blacks out on crammed ‘cattle’ train" - http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/32768/Girl-7-blacks-out-on-crammed-cattle-train" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; }

Yeeurgh!

How about just planning cities, and modern living & working space, better to avoid long commuter travelling altogether?

Because in America, people have traditionally preferred suburban living in large houses on large tracts of land to urban living in an apartment or condo. Affordable automobiles, affordable fuel, and a high speed highway network made that all possible. It's only in recent years that Americans, outside of traditionally urban-living areas like New York, have started to move into smaller housing closer to downtown work centers.

If you think commuting in crowded conditions is unpleasant, how about living in close proximity to others, with shared walls, and having little private land space? The former is only for a few hours per work day; the latter is there all of the time when you're at home.
 
RonDawg said:
If you think commuting in crowded conditions is unpleasant, how about living in close proximity to others, with shared walls, and having little private land space? The former is only for a few hours per work day; the latter is there all of the time when you're at home.
Why do you need to be crowded just to avoid travelling long distances? The two things are not logically dependent. They have been made so by the proliferation and ease of availability of passenger vehicles and fuel (viz. the evolution of extended and distant suburbs from the parent town that are made more readily habitable by ease of personal transport). But they need not necessarily be dependent. Are you saying it is inevitable that you have to be crowded to avoid travelling long distances?
 
All other variables being equal, yes you need to either live in crowded conditions or commute long distances. Now - more telecommuting helps change that. But, let's say I am a dentist and I need be in an area of 10,000 people to have a viable practice. They either live close to me or commute to see me or I travel to an office near them. At some point you either live close together or travel.

Note that a lot of people want to live on 10 acres of land. They will travel to do so. When you demand that much space, generally even going to the grocery store is going to be a several mile journey.

You can plan things better but you can't remove the reality that it is either density or travel. EVs are a pretty expensive way to have your cake and eat it too. They should only get better and allow us to continue to live apart....
 
davidcary said:
let's say I am a dentist and I need be in an area of 10,000 people to have a viable practice. They either live close to me or commute to see me or I travel to an office near them. At some point you either live close together or travel.
If the Gov is prepared to dish out $5k to your 10,000 clients for them to get EVs on a 3 year lease to come and see you - that's $13M pa - then perhaps they could instead invest the money in some satellite medical centres such that you (and other medical professionals) go and see clients more locally and move between the sites yourselves on a rotating basis?

This would be no different to having part-time staffed facilities in small country practices that do not justify permanent staff. In Australia, they fly doctors out to remote communities for a few days at a time, which is far more practical than expecting the clients to come to the cities to see the doctors.

Or you could provide a mobile practice in the back of a truck. It would probably be cheaper than renting premises at all, and you just drive it to a different locality each day. They used to provide 'mobile libraries' where I used to live to provide exactly this service, but now everyone has cars and it's easier just to burn up some fuel going to the central library in a distant city now (because they've closed the local libraries too!).

I don't see the particular scenario you present as insurmountable.
 
davidcary said:
All other variables being equal, yes you need to either live in crowded conditions or commute long distances. Now - more telecommuting helps change that. But, let's say I am a dentist and I need be in an area of 10,000 people to have a viable practice. They either live close to me or commute to see me or I travel to an office near them. At some point you either live close together or travel.

Note that a lot of people want to live on 10 acres of land. They will travel to do so. When you demand that much space, generally even going to the grocery store is going to be a several mile journey.

You can plan things better but you can't remove the reality that it is either density or travel. EVs are a pretty expensive way to have your cake and eat it too. They should only get better and allow us to continue to live apart....

my sister in law recommended her dentist to me and then she moved to Port Orchard (about 52 miles away) but continued seeing the Dentist for 10+ years (yep, she drove) until he retired a few years ago. She even stuck with him when she changed jobs and he was no longer in her "provider network" so its like any business. its not so much the environment you live in; its the environment you create
 
Back
Top