COMPARISON OF TESLA MODEL 3 AND MODEL S

The main purpose of this article is to determine how much AC electricity has to be drawn from the wall socket to have one kWh of DC in the battery. This appears straightforward, but it is not, because it takes energy to convert from AC to DC and to overcome the internal resistance of the battery.

Also, once the electricity is in the battery, it is used to operate the vehicle’s systems, whether in motion or not, such as heating/cooling the cabin and battery. That electricity loss is called vampire loss; it is not available to get from A to B.

 

People who park their EV at an airport and come back two weeks later may be in for a surprise, because they have much less charge in the battery than when they left. As a result of these losses, significant additional electricity needs to be generated by power plants. 

It is important to understand, due to the charging/vampire loss, it takes the Tesla Model S, driven in upstate New York (similar conditions as New England) about 0.434 kWh/mile of AC electricity from the wall meter to provide 0.333 kWh/mile of DC electricity in the battery. The combined charging/vampire loss factor is about 0.434/0.333 = 1.303.

The Tesla Model 3, driven in Southern California, has a loss factor of about 0.308/0.245 = 1.2573. See tables 1, 2, 3 and 4

NOTE: The Vermont grid load (electricity fed to grid) was about 6.0 TWh in 2018. If all Vermont light duty vehicles using gasoline were to be replaced by EVs, the additional grid load would be about 3.075 TWh. Heat pumps would be in addition. Any vehicles using diesel fuel are not included. See table 1.

A Tesla Model S costs about 8.24 c/mile/5.85 c/mile = 1.41 times more to drive per mile than a Tesla Model 3, because:

 

-  It is a heavier vehicle  

-  It is based on less-recent technologies

- The S is driven in upstate NY and the 3 is driven in southern California

 

Table 1/Vermont LDV travel

 6.272 billion miles/y

In battery electricity for a mix of LDVs, as DC

 0.350 kWh/mile

Charging/vampire loss factor

 1.303

Transmission and distribution loss factor

 1.075

Electricity fed to grid to charge EVs

 3.075 TWh/y

LONG-TERM ROAD TEST OF TESLA MODEL 3 

 

Edmunds, in California, has been performing a long-term road test of a Tesla Model 3 since January 2018. Here are the latest results from the Edmunds website.

https://www.edmunds.com/tesla/model-3/2017/long-term-road-test/2017...

 

- Edmond one-year average mpg, with various drivers, various road trips, was about 30.80 kWh/100 miles, based on wall meter

- February, March and April were not shown, because of missing data. See table 2 and URL

- EV drivers know little of the charging/vampire loss; they rely on the lower numbers of the EV meter.

https://insideevs.com/monthly-plug-in-sales-scorecard/

 

In colder, hilly upstate New York (and New England) greater losses would be expected than in warmer, flat southern California.

 

NOTE: EPA combined for a 2018 Tesla Model 3, AWD, long-range, is 29 kWh/100 miles, wall meter basis, or 0.29 x 0.85 = 24.65 kWh/100 miles, vehicle meter basis. See table 2 and 3 and URL

https://fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymodel/2018_Tesla_Model_3.shtml

 

NOTE: The EPA tests in a laboratory based on wall meter, but does not account for real-world driving conditions, such as vampire loss, hot and cold weather operation, road conditions, snow, hilly terrain, more than one person and/or cargo in a vehicle. As a result the real-world consumption during the Edmund test was about 30.80 kWh/100 miles. See table 2.

https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/PowerSearch.do?action=noform&ye...

Table 2 shows the data recorded by Edmunds during the long-term road test of the Tesla Model 3

 

Table 2/Tesla Model 3

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Odometer

1388

2922

3937

5237

6009

6659

7679

9329

10307

11174

Travel/month, miles

1534

1015

1300

772

650

1020

1650

978

867

Wall meter, kWh/100 m

Real-world average

31.70

31.40

31.80

31.70

31.00

31.10

30.80

EPA combined

29.00

 

 

 

29.00

29.00

29.00

29.00

29.00

29.00

Vehicle meter, kWh/100 m

Real-world average

25.17

24.83

25.03

25.09

24.76

24.70

24.49

EPA combined

24.65

 

 

 

24.65

24.65

24.65

24.65

24.65

24.65

 

Table 3 shows the electricity from the wall meter, charging loss, vampire loss, the electricity available for driving and the loss factor.

Table 3/MODEL 3, 2019, 100 kWh

%

kWh

 kWh/mile

Basis

EPA combined, WM basis

0.2900

EPA combined, VM basis

0.290 x 0.85

0.2465

.

%

kWh/y

Real-world driving, WM basis

3442/11174

3442

0.3080

Charging loss,

3442 x 0.15

15.00

516

WM

In battery, as DC,

3442 - 516

2925

VM

Vampire loss, as DC

100 x 188/2925

6.43

188

VM

Available for driving, as DC

2925 - 188

2737

VM

Miles driven

11174

Real-world driving, VM basis

2737/11174

0.2450

Charging/vampire loss factor

0.3080/0.245

1.2573

.

Electricity cost, c/kWh

19

Travel cost, c/mile

19 x 3442/11174

5.85

 

ONE-YEAR EXPERIENCE WITH A TESLA MODEL S

 

An upstate New York owner of a Tesla Model S measured the house meter kWh, vehicle meter kWh, and miles for one year. There was significant kWh/mile variation throughout the year.

 

- The Model S has regenerative braking as a standard feature.

- The owner did not take into account the source-to-house electrical losses.

- New EVs would have less kWh/mile than older EVs, due to battery system aging.

- Data as measured by owner in New York State covers only the driving energy. The embedded energy and its CO2 are ignored.

 

See URLs, especially the second, which has a wealth of data.

 

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1090685_life-with-tesla-model-s...

http://www.uniteconomics.com/files/Tesla_Motors_Is_the_Model_S_Gree... 

About 1275 kWh of supercharger power was used for 4,000 miles of road trips, or 0.319 kWh/mile, per vehicle meter.

About 3799 kWh was used for 11243 miles of general driving, or 0.339 kWh/mile, per vehicle meter

Total 5074 kWh for 15243 miles, or 0.333 kWh/mile, per vehicle meter. See table 4

 

His real-world annual average was 0.434 kWh/mile, wall-meter and supercharger meter basis, and 0.333 kWh/mile, vehicle-meter basis; owners may use more or less than 0.434 kWh/mile in other US regions. 

In colder, hilly upstate New York (and New England) greater losses would be expected than in warmer, flat southern California.

 

NOTE: EPA combined for a 2019 Tesla Model S, AWD, 100 kWh battery, is 350 kWh/100 miles, wall meter basis, or 0.350 x 0.85, charging efficiency = 0.298 kWh/mile, vehicle meter basis. See URL

https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/PowerSearch.do?action=noform&ye...

 

NOTE: The EPA tests in a laboratory based on wall meter, but does not account for real-world conditions, such as vampire loss, hot and cold weather operation, road conditions, snow, hilly terrain, more than one person and/or cargo in a vehicle. As a result the real-world consumption is about 33.3 kWh/100 miles, vehicle meter basis. See table 4.

 

NOTE: It is important to understand it takes 0.434 kWh/mile of AC electricity to provide 0.333 kWh/mile as DC electricity in the battery. See table 4, which shows the electricity from the wall meter, charging loss, vampire loss, the electricity available for driving, and the loss factor.

NOTE: The charging and discharging of an EV battery is similar to having slowly increasing gas filling losses, due to a more and more leaky hose, into a slowly shrinking, slightly leaky, fuel tank*, plus having slowly decreasing miles per gallon, as your gasoline vehicle ages.

 

* In case of EVs, the growing losses of electricity are due to:

 

1) Slowly increasing charging/discharging losses (due to battery internal resistance increasing with age), into a battery, which has a capacity slowly decreasing with age; and

2) slowly increasing vampire losses.

 

Table 4/MODEL S, 2019, 100 kWh

%

kWh

Miles

 kWh/mile

Basis

EPA combined, WM basis

0.350

EPA combined, VM basis

0.350 x 0.85

0.298

.

Three long road trips

1275

4000

0.319

VM

General driving

3799

11243

0.339

VM

Real-world driving

5074

15243

0.333

VM

.

%

kWh/y

Real-world driving, WM basis

6614/15243

6614

0.434

Charging loss

6614 x 0.15

15.00

992

In battery, as DC

6614 - 992

5622

VM

Vampire loss, as DC

1.5 kWh/d x 365 d

9.74

548

VM

Available for driving, as DC

5611 - 548

5074

VM

Miles driven

15243

Real-world driving, VM basis

5074/15243

0.333

Charging/vampire loss factor

0.434/0.333

1.303
.

Interim readings

kWh/mile

EPA

Apr-Oct

0.301

0.298

VM

July

0.290

0.298

VM

Nov-Feb

0.371

0.298

VM

Jan

0.400

0.298

VM

.

Electricity cost, c/kWh

19

Travel cost, c/mile

19 x 6614/15243

8.24

COMPARISON OF CO2 EMISSIONS OF TESLA MODEL 3 AND TESLA MODEL S

 

New England Grid Emissions: In table 5:

 

The 322 g CO2/kWh, based on primary energy, is from the ISO-NE 2016 grid emissions report. ISO-NE ignores the CO2 of upstream energy.

The 322 g applies to all electricity drawn from the NE grid. See Note.

The 322 g increases to 346 g, at the wall meter, due to T&D losses.

Table 5 shows about 1.182 kWh/mile of energy is required to have 0.350 kWh/mile in the batteries of a mix of light duty vehicles, LDVs; cars, crossovers, minivans, SUVs, ¼-ton pick-ups.

The upstream energy mostly consists of electricity, diesel fuel, gas, etc.

The primary energy is the heat in the fuel fed to the gas turbines that are assumed to operate at 50% efficiency.

Electricity Moving at Near the Speed of Light on the Grid

- As Vermont is connected to the NE-grid, any electricity drawn from the grid is the grid mix, which likely would have a fossil fuel component, i.e., not some hypothetical, artificial “Vermont mix” or “New Hampshire mix” based on commercial power supply contracts, such as Green Mountain Power of Vermont contracting to buy low-cost, low-CO2 electricity from the Seabrook Nuclear Plant.

- Electricity moves on the grid as electromagnetic waves at near the speed of light, i.e., from northern Maine to southern Florida, about 1800 miles in 0.01 second, or Vermont's length, 160 miles, in 0.0009 seconds; the electrons vibrate in place at 60 cycles per second and migrate at about 1 inch/second. In fact, if electricity did not move that fast, no electric grid would work.

- For people to proclaim, without scientific proof, there is a “Vermont mix”, or a “New Hampshire mix”, is beyond rational.

 

Table 5

kWh/mile

NE grid CO2

gram/kWh

Source energy

1.182

Upstream for NG extraction, processing, transport, etc., 17%

0.158

Primary energy = LNG or NG energy as heat to gas turbine plants

1.010

Conversion loss, 50%

0.505

Gross electricity generation

0.505

Plant self-use loss, 3.0%

0.015

Net electricity generation = Fed to grid

0.490

322

T&D loss, 7.5%

0.034

Fed to meters, as AC

0.456

347

Charging/vampire loss factor = 1.303, same as Tesla Model S in NY)

0.106

In batteries for a mix of LDVs, as DC

0.350

 

Electric Vehicles CO2 Emissions

 

If ALL Vermont light duty vehicles using gasoline were replaced by electric vehicles, and the charging/vampire loss factor were 1.303 (same as a Tesla Model S in NY), and the “in battery” kWh/mile as DC were 0.350, and the travel were 6.272 billion miles per year, then the electricity drawn from the grid would be 6.272 b miles/y x 0.350 x 1.303 x 1.075, T&D  = 3.075 TWh/y.

 

According to ISO-NE, electricity “fed to the grid” has CO2 emissions of 322 g/kWh, and “fed to meters” 347 g/kWh in 2016.

 

The annual CO2 emissions, fuel only during the driving phase, would be 3.075 TWh/y x 322 g/kWh x 1 million g/metric ton = 990,150 metric ton/y. The ISO-NE grid is “clean”, i.e., low CO2/kWh, compared to the rest of the US.

 

Excluded is the CO2, due to extraction of minerals from sources (mines, wells, fracking) for vehicle and battery pack manufacturing, and processing and transport of the materials to users and to infrastructures engaged in battery/vehicle manufacturing and delivery to customers, repairs/replacements during the driving phase, and processing/storage/landfill during the decommissioning phase.

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/ifo-institute-study-cas...

 

Gasoline Vehicle CO2 Emissions

 

Burning a gallon of E10 produces about 17.6 pounds of CO2 from the fossil fuel content, about 18.9 pounds of CO2, if emissions from ethanol are included.

 

The average mileage of Vermont LDVs was about 20.713 miles/gal of E10 (90%gasoline/10% ethanol), in 2016

 

The annual CO2 emissions would be 6.272 b miles/y x 1/20.713 x 18.9 lb/gal x 1 metric ton/2204.62 lb = 2,826,710 metric ton/y; upstream CO2, due to extraction, cropping, processing and transport, is excluded.

 

Excluded is the CO2, due to extraction of minerals from sources (mines, wells, fracking) for vehicle manufacturing, and processing and transport of the materials to users and to infrastructures engaged in vehicle manufacturing and delivery to customers, repairs/replacements during the driving phase, and processing/storage/landfill during the decommissioning phase.

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/ifo-institute-study-cas...

Electric Vehicles

IC Vehicles

3.075

TWh/y, fed to grid

6.272

billion miles/y

322

g/kWh, fed to grid

20.713

miles/gal

1000000

g/metric ton

18.9

CO2/gal of E10

2204.62

lb/metric ton

990150

metric ton CO2/y

2595919

metric ton CO2/y

APPENDIX 1

Here is an article that fairly sums up some of the issues of electric vehicles.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/youll-save-money-on-gas-with-a-te...

Views: 192

Comment

You need to be a member of Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power - Maine to add comments!

Join Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power - Maine

Comment by Thinklike A. Mountain on March 8, 2019 at 6:51pm

I've read that electric cars are more expensive to insure and that this can be based on a number of factors such as:

1. Used more in urban settings where cars tend to be packed closer to each other on the road causing more accidents.

2. Lighter materials may be used meaning collision damage may be more severe

3. Damage to battery and other electronics may cost more to repair

4. Electric cars accelerate faster

 Given the faster loss in resale value for electric vehicles, are they more likely to get totaled by the insurance company sending them to be crushed sooner?

Comment by Thinklike A. Mountain on March 8, 2019 at 3:07pm

Tesla Chaos: VP of Engineering Quits, Factories See Frantic Cost Cutting

https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/03/08/tesla-chaos-vp-of-enginee...

Comment by Willem Post on March 8, 2019 at 1:21pm

Art,

At the bottom of the article it shows the CO2 is much less for EVs and ICs

Comment by Art Brigades on March 8, 2019 at 11:31am

Got it thanks.  

My interest isn't so much in which is the better Tesla luxury car, but more generally how viable are EVs for the average Joe who drives a Civic or Corolla. 

Comparing gas vehicles, if someone drives a 20 MPG car and pays $2.25 per gallon of gas, the cost per mile is 11 cents.

If it's a 25 MPG car the cost per mile is 9 cents.

A 30 MPG car costs 7.5 cents per mile.

If gas is at $2.75 per gallon then the respective costs per mile are .138, .11, .092

Cost of vehicle purchase aside, electricity and gas seem to be comparable in drive cost. 

It looks like your exercise used electricity priced at 19 cents per KWH. Maine customers pay closer to 16 cents.

If time of use metering could deliver electricity at night (when most vehicle charging must occur) for 7 or 8 cents per KWH, that might be a big incentive for EV purchasing.

Alternatively, is it even reasonable to think a backyard-windmill could be used at night to charge an EV?

 

Comment by Willem Post on March 8, 2019 at 9:12am

Thinklike,

Thank you for this info. I had read about the door handles, etc., but not the dirt.

It looks like Tesla will come up with a fix fairly soon.

They are producing the Model 3 at about 6500 per week, and just a few of them end up in the northeast.

I have made some additions to the text

Comment by Willem Post on March 8, 2019 at 9:02am

Art,

At the bottom of tables 3 and 4 are cost per mile.

A Tesla Model S costs about 8.24 c/mile/5.85 c/mile = 1.41 times more to drive per mile than a Tesla Model 3, because:

 

-  It is a heavier vehicle  

-  It is based on less-recent technologies

- The S is driven in upstate NY and the 3 is driven in southern California

I am sure you can calculate the cost per mile of your car and of cars with different mileages.

I will add a section on CO2 emission reduction, which are not nearly as high as the glorious claims made by non-engineering types, who have no trouble being for the mantra of "100% renewables", but have not a clue what that implies.

Just ask them, do you mean all energy or just electric energy, which is only 40% of all primary energy.

Comment by Art Brigades on March 8, 2019 at 12:51am

Willem -  this is a blog, not a Greek lesson.  Can't understand, let alone find the Where's Waldo number you mention.  Spare us the 6000 column inches and just make your point. 

Comment by Thinklike A. Mountain on March 7, 2019 at 11:14pm

"35 Pounds" Of Dirt Trapped In Tesla Model 3 Reveals Stunning Design Flaw

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-03-07/35-pounds-dirt-trapped-te...

Comment by Willem Post on March 7, 2019 at 5:32pm

The cost per mile is shown for the two EVs.

I am sure you can calculate the cost per mile for cars with different MPGs

Comment by Art Brigades on March 7, 2019 at 4:34pm

How does the cost to drive a gas vehicle compare to driving an electric vehicle? 

Hannah Pingree on the Maine expedited wind law

Hannah Pingree - Director of Maine's Office of Innovation and the Future

"Once the committee passed the wind energy bill on to the full House and Senate, lawmakers there didn’t even debate it. They passed it unanimously and with no discussion. House Majority Leader Hannah Pingree, a Democrat from North Haven, says legislators probably didn’t know how many turbines would be constructed in Maine."

https://pinetreewatch.org/wind-power-bandwagon-hits-bumps-in-the-road-3/

 

Maine as Third World Country:

CMP Transmission Rate Skyrockets 19.6% Due to Wind Power

 

Click here to read how the Maine ratepayer has been sold down the river by the Angus King cabal.

Maine Center For Public Interest Reporting – Three Part Series: A CRITICAL LOOK AT MAINE’S WIND ACT

******** IF LINKS BELOW DON'T WORK, GOOGLE THEM*********

(excerpts) From Part 1 – On Maine’s Wind Law “Once the committee passed the wind energy bill on to the full House and Senate, lawmakers there didn’t even debate it. They passed it unanimously and with no discussion. House Majority Leader Hannah Pingree, a Democrat from North Haven, says legislators probably didn’t know how many turbines would be constructed in Maine if the law’s goals were met." . – Maine Center for Public Interest Reporting, August 2010 https://www.pinetreewatchdog.org/wind-power-bandwagon-hits-bumps-in-the-road-3/From Part 2 – On Wind and Oil Yet using wind energy doesn’t lower dependence on imported foreign oil. That’s because the majority of imported oil in Maine is used for heating and transportation. And switching our dependence from foreign oil to Maine-produced electricity isn’t likely to happen very soon, says Bartlett. “Right now, people can’t switch to electric cars and heating – if they did, we’d be in trouble.” So was one of the fundamental premises of the task force false, or at least misleading?" https://www.pinetreewatchdog.org/wind-swept-task-force-set-the-rules/From Part 3 – On Wind-Required New Transmission Lines Finally, the building of enormous, high-voltage transmission lines that the regional electricity system operator says are required to move substantial amounts of wind power to markets south of Maine was never even discussed by the task force – an omission that Mills said will come to haunt the state.“If you try to put 2,500 or 3,000 megawatts in northern or eastern Maine – oh, my god, try to build the transmission!” said Mills. “It’s not just the towers, it’s the lines – that’s when I begin to think that the goal is a little farfetched.” https://www.pinetreewatchdog.org/flaws-in-bill-like-skating-with-dull-skates/

Not yet a member?

Sign up today and lend your voice and presence to the steadily rising tide that will soon sweep the scourge of useless and wretched turbines from our beloved Maine countryside. For many of us, our little pieces of paradise have been hard won. Did the carpetbaggers think they could simply steal them from us?

We have the facts on our side. We have the truth on our side. All we need now is YOU.

“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”

 -- Mahatma Gandhi

"It's not whether you get knocked down: it's whether you get up."
Vince Lombardi 

Task Force membership is free. Please sign up today!

© 2019   Created by Webmaster.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service