energy losses under load which can be significant

energy losses under load which can be significant Auto

energy losses under load which can be significant

Do you buy an electric car paying as much attention to energy consumption as with a gasoline or diesel model? For those who proceed in this way, the values ​​communicated by the manufacturers or the on-board computers must be corrected more or less heavily!

In a study published Tuesday, July 21, 2020, Adac sought to measure the extent of the gap between the data communicated by the on-board electronics and the actual consumption.

The Association of Automobile Clubs of Germany has carried out this process both on diesel and petrol cars, and on models that run on natural gas or electricity.

While more or less significant differences were noted for vehicles of all energies, the interpretation is specific to electric cars: the energy losses observed during recharging are not taken into account.

scattered kW

In addition to the inaccuracies of the instrumentation, with EVs, there are kilowatts dispersed in the electrical installation, the terminal, the on-board charger and the battery. Some of these losses are cumulative.

Should we take this into account when calculating consumption? In any case, this is what the German organization defends by arguing that the electromobilien has to bear financially, more or less, most of these losses.

The federation pleads so that the manufacturers take into account in the consumption communicated for the electric cars of this dissipated energy without being used to move the vehicle forward. It also asks them to work on the efficiency of charging systems.

Bad students

Of the dozen different electric cars selected by Adac, the 5 models with the most unrealistic figures show deltas greater than 17%. The Tesla Model 3 is the worst performer here, with almost 25% error for its Long Range variation, but surprisingly “only” 18% with the Standard Range Plus.

Equally curious is the 20.8% difference attributed to the Seat Mii electric when its twin Volkswagen e-up! Almost taunt it with a 15.8% representing almost the average of the values ​​collected.

Behind, the Renault Zoé is between 18.4 and 19%, with a good homogeneity between the 2 models retained by the federation. The Nissan Leaf and Jaguar i-Pace follow with a respective margin of 17.6 and 17.4%

A single model below 10% error

The Kia e-Niro 64 kWh is doing the best this year with a deviation of 9.9% from actual consumption including the various sources of loss. Double hit with the e-Soul 64 kWh which shares 12.2% with the BMW i3 (120 Ah).

Again a Korean on the 4th step: Hyundai Ioniq electric (12.3%). The Audi e-tron also shines by staying below 15% error (14%). The Mini Cooper SE and Mercedes EQC400 4Matic barely come close with 15.3 and 15.9% respectively of energy to add to the consumption indicated by the on-board computer.

energy losses under load which can be significant

Author’s opinion

The interesting thing about the study carried out by Adac is that it puts figures on the share of energy that can be billed to the user of an electric car without this volume being useful to move it forward.

We also salute the federation’s effort to have chosen very different models. Of course, we would have liked to find in the table the Tesla Model S, Peugeot e-208, Honda e, Opel Corsa-e, Smart Fortwo, Hyundai Kona, Kia e-Niro 39 kWh (for comparison), for example.

The work of Adac suffers from various inaccuracies that call for these figures to be taken primarily as orders of magnitude rather than very precise data.

To begin with, certain models are insufficiently identified (cf. Nissan Leaf, Renault Zoé, Hyundai Ioniq).

Differences necessarily exist depending on whether the vehicle is plugged into a fast charger, an accelerated terminal or a household outlet. The model of the external charging equipment also has an influence, as does the temperature of the battery and the surrounding temperature at the time of operation.

Several questions then arise: Do these percentages represent an average after several very diverse charging scenarios? Have all EVs been tested on the same charging equipment when accepted by all or most? What differences observed between slow, accelerated and fast recharges. Was the onboard temperature programming inactive on all cars?

Concretely, the methodology used to arrive at this classification is seriously lacking. One can even imagine that with different conditions, the latter would be quite different. As it stands, the numbers are barely usable. Can we lean on it to choose our next electric car? In my opinion: no!

We can especially remember from this study that the percentage of energy loss can be very important, at least up to 25%, and that the Korean models once again seem to be distinguished by their efficiency that one can imagine at the level of the charger. on-board and thermal management of the battery. For the rest, mystery!


Rate article