[TDCi4Life]

Excellent analysis.

Anyone who thinks EV's cost of acquisition and rate of electricity for charging said vehicle, will go down with broader adoption of EVs, is delusional.

The lazy logic suggests that prices of any commodity with increased consumption, should ideally go down. Maybe onions and potatoes.

Whatever might be the macro economic reasons, one should simply look at the bait and switch situation for CNG.

Renewable energy component needs to increase, without a doubt. Be warned though, just look at the per unit costs of electricity in Scandanavian countries ( even though some have surplus now). And please, let us not even get into dreaming of a scenario where an average Indian, will either have the income or quality of life on par with those countries in the foreseeable future

We should strive to reduce carbon emissions. But, for heaven's sake, let us not get fooled by governments and the elites, who are intent on using environmental responsibility as a financial cudgel against the middle class.

As long as there is no pricing parity between EVs and ICE vehicles, the whole 'Go Green' charade is nothing but an enticing medium to facilitate transfer of wealth.

No wonder, the only ones jumping on the EV badwagon, are either way above the median income category or those who didn't get the math right.

Honestly, I would ditch my diesel at the next window of opportunity for a strong hybrid. I would willingly pay 10-20% more than its ICE counterparts. Only if the cost of electricity was baked into a sustainable cost of ownership . Not entrapped like current CNG owners.

I also wish I had the financial depth to indulge in my planet saving virtues, only to the benefit of bankrolling deviant governments and monolithic financial institutions.

Sorry, my dear Planet Earth. That time will have to wait. My wallet is not yet ready for that commitment.

[salbin]

Originally Posted by ajayc123

@salbin it appears that your statements are factually off. The strong hybrid runs on a different combustion cycle ( Atkinson cycle at specified rpms) to derive better fuel efficiency. The battery acts as intermediary to run the car for shorter distances at low speeds while the engine is off, and the battery is recharged by the switching on of the engine. Thus combination helps with higher efficiency besides braking regen.

Efficiency of ICE is 35~40%
Efficiency of Electric Motor is 90~95%

While driving a Strong Hybrid with EV mode, it is actually burning fossil fuel (rather burnt) using Atkinson Cycle IC Engine with an efficiency of ~40% (60% wasted as Heat) and generate Electricity using Motor/Alternator at an efficiency of ~90% (10% loss) and Charge the Battery with approx ~98% efficiency (2% lost in AC-DC conversion and charger circuit), then use that power to drive the wheels at ~90% efficiency (10% lost as heat).
Regenerative braking can be considered as bonus.

As per Law of Conservation of Energy or First Law of Thermodynamics: Energy is neither created nor destroyed.

[d.j]

Superb work, very elaborate, informative and thanks for the post!

Spending more money to save money, that itself, at least to me, is a fairy thing. plus, there are so many variables to a situation that a decisive outcome is always at question, off course, exception do exist. Mileage of car should be sequenced somewhere 3rd to 5th position (again exception do exits) in car selection checklist and not the prime factor in choosing a car, I will still buy a petrol or a diesel car, stay away from the EV story for at least 4-5 years probably wait for the “phone” to the “iPhone” moment.

Also, the role of GST compound is illusive, we can't make an assessment on how much of technology or product we are getting at per spend and how much an ICE manufacturer is cutting cost to be stay competitive with the EV developments. Purpose of a car/vehicle is not to burn fuel but to transport people and goods safely, swiftly from one place to another, government subsidy to EV is interference to the natural progression and development of an industry, a new race of “ kitna deti hai” will begin and we may miss one more cycle of receiving the same world class products.

And how big will the carbon footprint record we don't know it yet!

Regards/DJ

[ajayc123]

Originally Posted by salbin

Efficiency of ICE is 35~40%
Efficiency of Electric Motor is 90~95%

While driving a Strong Hybrid with EV mode, it is actually burning fossil fuel (rather burnt) using Atkinson Cycle IC Engine with an efficiency of ~40% (60% wasted as Heat) and generate Electricity using Motor/Alternator at an efficiency of ~90% (10% loss) and Charge the Battery with approx ~98% efficiency (2% lost in AC-DC conversion and charger circuit), then use that power to drive the wheels at ~90% efficiency (10% lost as heat).
Regenerative braking can be considered as bonus.

As per Law of Conservation of Energy or First Law of Thermodynamics: Energy is neither created nor destroyed.

I had assumed that you would interpret my feedback in the correct context, which is that the efficiency comment was in the context of the Otto ICE cycle, that is used in the weak hybrids. Anyways, I will not comment any further, to avoid making this thread as preface to the 101 course on Internal Combustion Engines.

[Vivek Ahuja]

Very very detailed analyses, but i am sure that the author doesn't drive an EV!

Any ICE including HYBRID as it still has an engine, 70% more mechanical parts and associated maintenance cycles... are actually not even comparable. seems the comparisons are done to only show that EVs are economically unviable, and i am sure the author owns an ICE or variant of an ICE for many years but not an EV so its just a one sided VIEW

Originally Posted by GeeTee TSI

Great presentation! Would be great if the same model in ICE and BEV avatar can be added to the analysis (Eg: Tiago ICE vs Tiago BEV and so on with Nexon and ZS EV/Astor)

For sure that would be a better comparison only by 2 owners of ICE and EV variant to give honest data. otherwise it will be biased.

[bva91]

Very Interesting, but the article is flawed as it does not compare similar models.

Ideally you'd want to compare something like the Nexon EV and the Nexon Diesel variant to really see what the break even point would be.

[Sankar]

Originally Posted by bva91

Very Interesting, but the article is flawed as it does not compare similar models.

Ideally you'd want to compare something like the Nexon EV and the Nexon Diesel variant to really see what the break even point would be.

Originally Posted by The Rationalist

Exactly! Most buyers except the enthusiasts buy cars based on budget, they shop across hatch, CSUV and MPV body styles. Even the ones looking for SUV body style look across CSUV, psuedo SUV. Budget is the first thing most buyers fix. So someone with ₹20 lakh budget will consider Nexon EV along the +4m pseudo SUV’s for sure.

Both views are opposing and I agree with both. Should one go via segment demarcated by budget or by conventional classification. Both are very valid thoughts.

24 lacs will buy one a comfortable Xover/MPV with comfortable seating for all but expensive to run and maintain or it will buy you a quick compact electric Xover which is cheap to run but the rear passengers will have to sit like they do on an indian closet and plan the trip to the minutest details for going out of orbit.

For a person with fixed budget but unclear needs it just got more confusing.

[motorworks]

Excellent analysis! Coincides with a similar comparison that autocar india has done earlier this month. So a very valid topic!

However, I’m not sure if we are at the cusp of any revolution.

Full Electrics—There aren’t enough options and while carmakers will keep launching new models, infrastructure build-up is a long way off. Even in metro cities this is going to take few years.

Strong Hybrid—A great alternative to diesel and Turbo petrols. However, where are the cars? Except Toyota and Suzuki, i’m not hearing much from other automakers. Honda did launch the City hybrid, but due to its cost, it seems more like ticking a box than anything else. Tata, Mahindra dont seem to be going this route and are heading straight to full electrics. I sense a similar approach from Hyundai and Kia as well.

Diesel—Unfortunately for bigger SUVs, there is just no replacement. Turbo petrols are very thirsty, we are seeing the likes of XUV700 delivering sub-optimal efficiency, so I really cannot think of Turbo petrols really replacing diesels in big SUVs. People say diesel is down and out. But just look at the sales of XUV700, Scorpio-N, Harrier, Safari, Compass, Meridian and even the new Tuscon. Yes, some cars dont have petrol as an option, but even where there is petrol, people are picking up diesels simply because Torque and efficiency go hand in hand with diesels on these big cars.


My view is that Strong hybrid seems to be a Toyota legacy, so they will push this technology, even at an affordable cost. But it looks like other automakers are going straight to full electrics.

[bva91]

Originally Posted by Sankar

Both views are opposing and I agree with both. Should one go via segment demarcated by budget or by conventional classification. Both are very valid thoughts.

24 lacs will buy one a comfortable Xover/MPV with comfortable seating for all but expensive to run and maintain or it will buy you a quick compact electric Xover which is cheap to run but the rear passengers will have to sit like they do on an indian closet and plan the trip to the minutest details for going out of orbit.

For a person with fixed budget but unclear needs it just got more confusing.

They're not contrasting, EVs have lower cost of running ... The question is in his many kms would it break even ... There's approx 4-5L difference between the top end model of Nexon petrol and Nexon EV Max.

And that's the analysis that makes sense... Not comparing an EV that's 10L more than the counterpart...

[ManneAtWheelz]

Originally Posted by pqr

HEV vs. Diesel vs. BEV: Total Cost of Ownership Study

Attachment 2368441

The mid-size SUV segment in India now has three low-running-cost vehicle options available, based on different technologies: conventional diesel engine (ICE) from Hyundai-KIA; strong hybrid (HEV) from Toyota-Maruti; and pure electric (BEV) from MG. There are numerous use cases, and each product and technology comes with its own set of advantages and limitations. So which one to choose?

This post with information vere level anniya (next level brother), for the first time seeing 123 thanks and counting contd. Don't remember when I saw these many thanks lastly. Gone through the post by bits and pieces, definitely will go through again. Thank you!

[84.monsoon]

Our government is brain-washed by impractical ideology, pointing out that strong hybrids such as the Toyota Hyryder also consume fuel and so are not worthy of subsidy! What they do not realise is that pure EVs require batteries that are 50-75 times higher in capacity than those in the strong hybrids. A Toyota Hyryder has a 0.76 KWH battery while an EV like the XUV400 has a 40 KWH battery, which is more than 50 times that of the Hyryder!

A strong hybrid will deliver double the fuel efficiency of an NA petrol and nearly triple that of a more powerful turbopetrol in city driving conditions. We could cut fuel imports attributed to new passenger vehicles sold in India by half, if the government comes up with meaningful GST rate reductions or subsidies for hybrids to make them price competitive with the Diesel and petrol variants. If the state governments also pitch in with road tax reductions, the transformation could be even faster. With EVs, it is going to be a long and painful adoption curve with no immediate fuel import savings possible for the country. We will need to continue to import millions of barrels of oil from Russia and elsewhere, damaging the environment as oil rich dictatorships get richer and richer.

India does not make any of the batteries going into EVs. A big push to pure EVs without incentivising hybrids, will increase requirements of large batteries and overall import dependency dramatically! Ultimately we are going to be at China's door, begging for millions of 50KWH batteries, whereas the smaller 0.75 KWH batteries can be sourced much more easily. The one on the Hyryder comes from Japan for instance Also the environmental damage that is caused in mining for rare earths to make large batteries is horrendous and it is going to nullify the green gains due to fuel savings. I hope our governments consider these aspects while making policy and rethink subsidies for strong hybrids.

[Innysta]

Do strong hybrid HEV cars get any govt subsidy? With average of +4L premium price from ICE cars, is there any incentives provided for HEV cars like lesser tax, income tax claims? That will come a motivating factor to go Green.

[84.monsoon]

Originally Posted by Innysta

Do strong hybrid HEV cars get any govt subsidy? With average of +4L premium price from ICE cars, is there any incentives provided for HEV cars like lesser tax, income tax claims? That will come a motivating factor to go Green.

Nope there are none as of now - but this is short-sighted. The arguments put up by Tata, Hyundai, Kia and M&M against any subsidies for hybrids are below. Of course, they argue thus becuase they do not have hybrid technology and have only ICE engines and pure EVs.

• Hybrids still consume petrol, so India will still have to import fuel, EVs don't consume any fuel at all
• they also need batteries with finite life, so import dependency for batteries does not go away. Battery replacements also need to be imported.

The first argument is totally misleading. A hybrid will consume only 50% of the fuel as a ICE vehicle for in-town runabouts which is where the vast majority of passenger cars are used. So would you rather save 50% fuel imports for hybrid applications today or wait for a decade for pure EVs to go mainstream? Also, that pure EV in India, is most almost certainly being charged from the dirtiest and most environmentally harmful source of power possible - old, coal fuelled power plants., which make up 75% of our power generation. On top, we are importing coal as well these days as we can't seem to figure out how to extract all that coal that lies beneath our country.

What they don't say on battery life: The reason Toyota hybrid batteries last so long is that the vehicles feature an efficient nickel-metal hydride battery pack. Battery management computer systems and a computer-controlled charge controller ensure that the battery charge doesn't exceed around 80% or fall below 20%. This computer-controlled shallow cycling dramatically improves the battery's cycle life, thermal management control, and long-term life. You can see in the various test drive photos etc. the battery is always at 2-3 bars out of 5 and never goes to full 5 bars even after a long hill descent. Similarly it seldom goes to 1 bar as it will be recharged as soon as it drops to lower levels of the second bar.

The big difference is that unlike pure EVs, the hybrid's battery does not have to be charged to its full. The range is not going to depend on the battery carrying a full charge, because the vehicle is anyway never powered entirely by the battery. This is the main reason behind the difference between pure EVs and hybrids in terms of battery life. Because of the fact that the batteries in the pure EV have to be always charged to the fullest to ensure maximum range, they tend degrade that much faster. With the petrol engine on board, the hybrid battery can be charged just a bit as and when required and discharged just a bit as well. This provides the necessary shallow cycle charging conditions to prolong the battery life vastly.

This is also the reason hybrids only need such small batteries as compared to pure EVs. The Innova has a 1.6 KWH battery while a typical EV of similar size will need to have 60-70 KHW to achieve similar range. That is 40 times the capacity of battery! The amount of mining and refinement activity for rare earths and consequent global warming to make a 60 KHW battery is not small! I firmly believe hybrids are a more environmentally friendly solution than pure EVS at this point in time for India, for this reason. You get 50% fuel savings for 5% of the rare earths that a pure EV needs - so do you extract 40 times more rare earths or save only 50% of the fuel?

[antz.bin]

I was checking out leasing options offered by my employer and noticed that the monthly ₹ outgo in leasing cost + fuel costs for the following 2 cars for running a measly 800km per month was exactly the same.

1. MG ZS EV Excite (₹23.9Lakh OTR Pune)
2. Skoda Kushaq 1.0 TSI Style MT (₹18.55 Lakh OTR Pune)

Everything else aside, the ZS is more powerful, longer, has a bigger boot, has 4 more Airbags, more features, accelerates faster, is automatic and still costs equal to the Kushaq.

No brainer really considering even if both suffer the same %age of depreciation by the end of the lease, the ZS will be worth more. I would consider 400km+ of rated range more than enough for most applications.

[shyampsunder]

Originally Posted by 84.monsoon

The first argument is totally misleading. A hybrid will consume only 50% of the fuel as a ICE vehicle for in-town runabouts which is where the vast majority of passenger cars are used. So would you rather save 50% fuel imports for hybrid applications today or wait for a decade for pure EVs to go mainstream? Also, that pure EV in India, is most almost certainly being charged from the dirtiest and most environmentally harmful source of power possible - old, coal fuelled power plants., which make up 75% of our power generation. On top, we are importing coal as well these days as we can't seem to figure out how to extract all that coal that lies beneath our country.

1. Grid is rapidly becoming greener making all EVs greener automatically. Even at 80% coal-based grid, EVs are greener than ICE. Many studies confirm it. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...s-rely-on-coal. For southern cities like Bangalore, grid is already 45%+ renewables.

2. India should not subsidize hybrids because it will mean our manufacturers won't have any incentives to build EVs. This is a once-in-a-century opportunity to take the lead in building a strong ecosystem for emerging technology. We will simply gravitate towards decades-old hybrid tech whose development. costs have been fully amortized if subsidies are gien. It will only hurt pioneers like Tata Motors who are actually investing and building an EV ecosystem from the ground up in India.

3. I don't how you are saying pure EVs are a decade away. We are experiencing a hockey stick growth rate in 2Ws and we will follow it in 4Ws. All EVs are massively back ordered with cabs rapidly leading the adoption pattern.

4. When we talk about the import of rare earths, we also need to consider that most of the battery is recycled. Especially the larger batteries have so much value in them to be used as stationary batteries once their automotive lifespan of a decade+ is over.

5. We have already tried incentivizing hybrids in the past. Companies just game it without providing any benefits.