Using Home Solar to Charge your Bolt for Free

[m16charged]

The idea of this is too awesome

 

[devbolt]

We've had a 4.94 kW system on the roof of our house for nearly 4.5 years. Annual production is about 6500 kWh. This covers most of our electrical needs and with net metering from PG&E has reduced our monthly bill to essentially nothing but mandatory bill minimums. Adding the Bolt will cause our electricity bill to go up, but some of the mandatory bill minimums will cover some of the usage, thankfully.

Because we did a lease, we're net positive from day one. Our monthly electricity bill averaged $250. Now we pay $100 or so for the lease, and $10 to PG&E. I estimate with the Bolt our bill will go up about $70 a month.

 

[new2evs]

We've had a 4.94 kW system on the roof of our house for nearly 4.5 years. Annual production is about 6500 kWh. This covers most of our electrical needs and with net metering from PG&E has reduced our monthly bill to essentially nothing but mandatory bill minimums. Adding the Bolt will cause our electricity bill to go up, but some of the mandatory bill minimums will cover some of the usage, thankfully.

Because we did a lease, we're net positive from day one. Our monthly electricity bill averaged $250. Now we pay $100 or so for the lease, and $10 to PG&E. I estimate with the Bolt our bill will go up about $70 a month.

I use way more than 70.00 a month in gas

 

[oilerlord]

We've had a 4.94 kW system on the roof of our house for nearly 4.5 years. Annual production is about 6500 kWh.

My system is roughly double your size, but I only managed 9100 kWh in it's first year. Gotta love solar in SoCal. We don't get as much sun but thankfully electricity is cheap these days. I'm on a spot plan...just got our bill for last month. 3.37 (Canadian!) cents per kWh. My solar is basically hibernating for the winter as I only generated 189 kWh in November.

I estimate I put about 500 kWh into my EV, so with fees - I figure it cost me about 25 bucks to drive ~1300 miles last month, and that's considering degraded range in cold temperatures. Not bad.

 

[devbolt]

We've had a 4.94 kW system on the roof of our house for nearly 4.5 years. Annual production is about 6500 kWh. This covers most of our electrical needs and with net metering from PG&E has reduced our monthly bill to essentially nothing but mandatory bill minimums. Adding the Bolt will cause our electricity bill to go up, but some of the mandatory bill minimums will cover some of the usage, thankfully.

Because we did a lease, we're net positive from day one. Our monthly electricity bill averaged $250. Now we pay $100 or so for the lease, and $10 to PG&E. I estimate with the Bolt our bill will go up about $70 a month.

I use way more than 70.00 a month in gas

I currently drive a Prius that gets 50 mpg. My gas costs are about $90 a month. I'm not buying the Bolt to save on gas. I'm buying it to help save on air.

 

[oilerlord]

I currently drive a Prius that gets 50 mpg. My gas costs are about $90 a month. I'm not buying the Bolt to save on gas. I'm buying it to help save on air.

Just wondering...your Prius is already a very fuel efficient car, and as a Super Ultra-Low Emissions Vehicle, only emits 186 grams of CO2 per mile. With that in consideration, and to your point about buying a Bolt to "help save on air" - are you doing that to make a statement, or to make a difference? Please consider your answer carefully, because there is a big difference between the two.

 

[devbolt]

I currently drive a Prius that gets 50 mpg. My gas costs are about $90 a month. I'm not buying the Bolt to save on gas. I'm buying it to help save on air.

Just wondering...your Prius is already a very fuel efficient car, and as a Super Ultra-Low Emissions Vehicle, only emits 186 grams of CO2 per mile. With that in consideration, and to your point about buying a Bolt to "help save on air" - are you doing that to make a statement, or to make a difference? Please consider your answer carefully, because there is a big difference between the two.

Both. I believe in putting my money where my mouth is, and that means buying cars that are better for the environment, whether it's just a higher MPG vehicle, a hybrid, or one that uses advanced technology like a plug-in hybrid or a pure EV. We opted to buy a Highlander Hybrid instaead of a regular Highlander despite the $5000 or more premium. That meant buying a Plug-in Prius 5 years ago. The Bolt will be essentially replacing a Mini Countryman and the PiP will remain in the family.

 

[oilerlord]

Both. I believe in putting my money where my mouth is, and that means buying cars that are better for the environment, whether it's just a higher MPG vehicle, a hybrid, or one that uses advanced technology like a plug-in hybrid or a pure EV.

Ok. It's interesting that every time I've asked that question, it's answered as "both". I think that may be because as a society we're cautious in making statements, so we hedge somewhere in the middle. Don't want to offend anyone, or appear as being shallow or conceited. If you would have simply said, "Statement, Damn it, I'm flipping the bird to Big Oil", the clarity and conviction in that garners it's own respect.

I asked because there wasn't much context in the Prius reference vs buying a Bolt. In all candor, I thought you were of the belief that people that choose to drive a more fuel efficient car (like a Prius) are killing the planet - which is why you were getting rid of it and buying a Bolt.

 

[devbolt]

Both. I believe in putting my money where my mouth is, and that means buying cars that are better for the environment, whether it's just a higher MPG vehicle, a hybrid, or one that uses advanced technology like a plug-in hybrid or a pure EV.

Ok. It's interesting that every time I've asked that question, it's answered as "both". I think that may be because as a society we're cautious in making statements, so we hedge somewhere in the middle. Don't want to offend anyone, or appear as being shallow or conceited. If you would have simply said, "Statement, Damn it, I'm flipping the bird to Big Oil", the clarity and conviction in that garners it's own respect.

I asked because there wasn't much context in the Prius reference vs buying a Bolt. In all candor, I thought you were of the belief that people that choose to drive a more fuel efficient car (like a Prius) are killing the planet - which is why you were getting rid of it and buying a Bolt.

I'm not being cautious here, I'm being honest in that I have multiple factors driving my purchase decision.
Wanting to drive a car that is better for the environment and wanting to drive a car that is more energy efficient and wanting to drive a more technologically advanced car all don't have to be exclusive of each other. I like technology, I like saving money on what it takes to drive my car. And I like being more environmentally conscious.

Big oil isn't going away anytime soon. Neither are ICE vehicles. I'm not one of those true believers who think that we have to immediately abandon ICE vehicles now in favor of alternative energy vehicles and doing anything else is just destroying the planet. But the sooner we transition to alternative energy sources, the better. It will take time to do so. Could be a generation or two to accomplish. Meanwhile, I'm doing my part to help that process along. And I get to play with nifty new technology and save on operating costs.

 

[SeanNelson]

I currently drive a Prius that gets 50 mpg.

Just wondering... ...are you doing that to make a statement, or to make a difference? Please consider your answer carefully, because there is a big difference between the two.

Speaking as the owner of a Prius C who wants to buy a Bolt, I'm basically doing it because I love to drive and I hate to pollute. The Prius C is easier on the gas than almost anything else out there, but I still try to minimize my fuel consumption and I find the car very frustrating to drive because the engine comes on at the slightest provocation. It's not the car's fault - it is an ICE vehicle after all and the battery is there just to help make the ICE more efficient. But I find it bugs the heck out of me.

That's why I call the Prius a "gateway drug to EVs". It gives you just a little hint of what you could do if you had a "real" electric car.

So I'm looking forward to buying a Bolt in the coming year and going for drives around my region without ever having to baby the car or limit my driving style in order to avoid burning gas. I live in an area where virtually all the electricity is hydroelectric, so driving really will be fossil fuel free. I can hardly wait...

And although this isn't specific to an EV, I'm also looking forward very much to some of the new features that I don't have on my Prius. Things like the electronic rear view mirror, birds-eye view for parking, etc. But I think the feature that I'm going to enjoy most is the heated steering wheel. You can turn the heat up as much as you want but until that steering wheel warms up (and it always seems to take forever) it sucks the heat right out of your hands.

 

[michael]

The other thing I believe you will find is that an EV drives much better (smooth, quiet, etc) than an ICE or hybrid. To me that's a lot of the appeal.

I think the Volt is a big gateway too. People get one, knowing they will never be range-limited. Then they discover that they rarely exceed the 40-50 mile EV range, and only exceed 200 miles on planned trips. So they realize a 200 mile Bolt is essentially risk-free.

 

[oilerlord]

The other thing I believe you will find is that an EV drives much better (smooth, quiet, etc) than an ICE or hybrid. To me that's a lot of the appeal.

Pretty much sums it up for me too. I'm hooked on how my EV drives, but knowing that on sunny days, my car is being refueled from sunshine always puts a smile on my face. It never gets old.

 

[Fargoneandout]

I currently drive a Prius that gets 50 mpg. My gas costs are about $90 a month. I'm not buying the Bolt to save on gas. I'm buying it to help save on air.

Just wondering...your Prius is already a very fuel efficient car, and as a Super Ultra-Low Emissions Vehicle, only emits 186 grams of CO2 per mile. With that in consideration, and to your point about buying a Bolt to "help save on air" - are you doing that to make a statement, or to make a difference? Please consider your answer carefully, because there is a big difference between the two.

I'm with Devbolt on this, not that I am taking sides. A Prius C demonstrably emits more CO2 than a Bolt does nearly regardless of the ultimate source of the Bolt's electrical supply in the U.S. Not according to me but according to the Union of Concerned Scientists.

http://www.ucsusa.org/clean-vehicles/electric-vehicles/life-cycle-ev-emissions#.WGGCCLGZMzE

Turns out that electrical transmission losses are slight and because EV's have far less heat loss they are by nature more efficient. Factor in more efficient conversion of chemical energy into mechanical force and efficient power delivery across the grid and even if coal is the source, EV's still add less CO2. And, if Devbolt uses home solar, then the Bolt's margin of superiority nearly any vehicle rooted in an ICE is even wider.

The UOCS site also allows you to plug in your vehicle and location and get the true CO2 emitted based on power source (I think). And they do factor in the greater energy cost associated with putting the battery together.

 

[oilerlord]

I'm with Devbolt on this, not that I am taking sides. A Prius C demonstrably emits more CO2 than a Bolt does nearly regardless of the ultimate source of the Bolt's electrical supply in the U.S. Not according to me but according to the Union of Concerned Scientists.

http://www.ucsusa.org/clean-vehicles/electric-vehicles/life-cycle-ev-emissions#.WGGCCLGZMzE

Turns out that electrical transmission losses are slight and because EV's have far less heat loss they are by nature more efficient. Factor in more efficient conversion of chemical energy into mechanical force and efficient power delivery across the grid and even if coal is the source, EV's still add less CO2. And, if Devbolt uses home solar, then the Bolt's margin of superiority nearly any vehicle rooted in an ICE is even wider.

While technically true, there is a critical flaw in your logic.

Devbolt mentioned: "The Bolt will be essentially replacing a Mini Countryman"

What does that actually mean?

He didn't say he was crushing the Mini Countryman - merely replacing it. Big difference. When we "replace" cars, that usually means we sell or trade them in - the point being, instead of the planet having to deal with only one car on the road (Mini), now there are two cars (Bolt + Mini) that are emitting CO2 either directly or indirectly. That doesn't even take into account the energy and natural resources that it required to manufacture the Bolt. From a net environmental win/loss perspective, the planet took a loss.

 

[SeanNelson]

He didn't say he was crushing the Mini Countryman - merely replacing it. Big difference. When we "replace" cars, that usually means we sell or trade them in - the point being, instead of the planet having to deal with only one car on the road (Mini), now there are two cars (Bolt + Mini) that are emitting CO2 either directly or indirectly.

Well if you go with that view then it means all the cars ever manufactured should still be on the road. At some point the car that you sell replaces someone else's older car, which in turn replaces another older car, etc. until the oldest one gets scrapped.

What determines the amount of CO2 emissions is a combination of the overall size of the US vehicle fleet and the average emissions per vehicle. Buying new, emissions-free vehicles will start to lower that average, and that's what really counts.

 

[Fargoneandout]

According to the EPA combustion of one gallon of gasoline yields 8.89 kilos of CO(2). According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, production of a BEV with a range of 265 miles produces about 12,000 kilos of CO(2) - see Figure 7 of the report. That 12,000 kilos of CO(2) is equivalent to 1,348 gallons of fuel. At combined MPG of 27 you could drive the Countryman just 36,000 miles and break even on production of a new Bolt.

I'm sure that my calculations can be critiqued, as can the report itself, but it is also beyond dispute that there IS a emissions cost for a Bolt and that there IS a break even point beyond which continuing to drive the Countryman - or any ICE - will pollute more than buying and operating that Bolt.

 

[oilerlord]

Well if you go with that view then it means all the cars ever manufactured should still be on the road. At some point the car that you sell replaces someone else's older car, which in turn replaces another older car, etc. until the oldest one gets scrapped.

It's not really a "view", it's basic math. It baffles me that people attempt to spin a net positive to the environment when trading in their low mileage, 2-3 year old, fuel efficient car for a new, more efficient car. Their trade in ends up on the dealer's pre-owned lot, and is sold to and driven by the next owner. Again, and simply put, there are now two cars on the road. More cars on the road = more emissions, and since 2000, there are approximately 40 million more of them on the road contributing to climate change.

Compare that to drivers that hold onto their fuel efficient cars for at least 10 years or 100,000 miles. They extend a vehicle's life cycle instead of irresponsibly adding to the number of cars on the road. While that seems to be frowned upon these days, at least they subscribe to the environmental concept of reuse, renew, and recycle.

 

[oilerlord]

According to the EPA combustion of one gallon of gasoline yields 8.89 kilos of CO(2). According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, production of a BEV with a range of 265 miles produces about 12,000 kilos of CO(2) - see Figure 7 of the report. That 12,000 kilos of CO(2) is equivalent to 1,348 gallons of fuel. At combined MPG of 27 you could drive the Countryman just 36,000 miles and break even on production of a new Bolt.

I'm sure that my calculations can be critiqued, as can the report itself, but it is also beyond dispute that there IS a emissions cost for a Bolt and that there IS a break even point beyond which continuing to drive the Countryman - or any ICE - will pollute more than buying and operating that Bolt.

I'll stipulate that a Bolt is has lower emissions than the Countryman - or any ICE, however buying and operating that Bolt adds to the combined CO2 from both cars.

Look beyond the numbers for a moment. Just because the original owner of the Mini Countryman isn't driving it anymore, rest assured - someone else is. Unless the car is crushed, it's emissions don't magically disappear - it's still burning gasoline, and spewing CO2.

 

[wwhitney]

It's not really a "view", it's basic math. It baffles me that people attempt to spin a net positive to the environment when trading in their low mileage, 2-3 year old, fuel efficient car for a new, more efficient car. Their trade in ends up on the dealer's pre-owned lot, and is sold to and driven by the next owner.

It is an interesting point. If I sell my old car and someone buys it, will the total miles driven by the populace go up? It seems to me there's 2 possibilities:

1) No, no one ends up making a car trip they wouldn't have otherwise. The person who buys my old car maybe retires an even older car, which gets resold. The buyer of that car maybe retires an even older car, etc. Eventually a really old car gets scrapped, and my new car has ended up replacing a really old car.

2) Yes, someone ends up making car trips they wouldn't otherwise have. I guess the way this comes about is that instead of scrapping the really old car, someone who has no car and can only afford a really old car buys it. The car enables trips otherwise not possible, perhaps reducing the use of public transit.

Either way, if the new car is electric, then the purchase has probably reduced the average pollution per vehicle mile traveled.

Cheers, Wayne

 

[devbolt]

I'm with Devbolt on this, not that I am taking sides. A Prius C demonstrably emits more CO2 than a Bolt does nearly regardless of the ultimate source of the Bolt's electrical supply in the U.S. Not according to me but according to the Union of Concerned Scientists.

http://www.ucsusa.org/clean-vehicles/electric-vehicles/life-cycle-ev-emissions#.WGGCCLGZMzE

Turns out that electrical transmission losses are slight and because EV's have far less heat loss they are by nature more efficient. Factor in more efficient conversion of chemical energy into mechanical force and efficient power delivery across the grid and even if coal is the source, EV's still add less CO2. And, if Devbolt uses home solar, then the Bolt's margin of superiority nearly any vehicle rooted in an ICE is even wider.

While technically true, there is a critical flaw in your logic.

Devbolt mentioned: "The Bolt will be essentially replacing a Mini Countryman"

What does that actually mean?

It means we are selling the Countryman to some other person. It will no longer be part of our personal carbon footprint. Presumably the person who buys the Countryman will be replacing a vehicle that no longer works, or is going for a more fuel efficient vehicle, or is adding an additional vehicle to their household (for various reasons).

He didn't say he was crushing the Mini Countryman - merely replacing it. Big difference. When we "replace" cars, that usually means we sell or trade them in - the point being, instead of the planet having to deal with only one car on the road (Mini), now there are two cars (Bolt + Mini) that are emitting CO2 either directly or indirectly. That doesn't even take into account the energy and natural resources that it required to manufacture the Bolt. From a net environmental win/loss perspective, the planet took a loss.

Well, in our case we're going from owning a Prius, Highlander Hybrid and a Countryman to owning a
Prius, Highlander Hybrid and a Bolt. The total number of vehicles in the household remains the same, with the same number of miles driven, and the same number of trips taken, but we've improved our overall "fleet" efficiency and lowered our carbon footprint. While the Bolt might've been more carbon intensive to manufacture, that deficit will be quickly wiped out within a couple of years. So I don't think the planet took a loss. Rather I think it got a small incremental win.