The Flawed Volkswagen Dieselgate Settlement & How to Fix it

While I typically keep a narrow focus on the content of this blog, that being to obsessively cover the BMW i3 electric car, occasionally I'll post something if I feel it has particular importance to the electric vehicle industry as a whole. Such is the case with this entry. For those of you unfamiliar with the Volkswagen "Clean Diesel" scandal, it basically amounts to the fact that Volkswagen cheated the emission testing in place and flooded the market with highly-polluting vehicles that were improperly called "Clean Diesel".

As a result, the Volkswagen Group was fined a record amount of money and forced to buy back or fix nearly half a million cars in the US which were operating in conflict with US emission laws. As part of the penalty, Volkswagen was ordered to pay a 2 billion dollar penalty, which would be used to fund zero emission infrastructure, and improve access to ZEVs.

On face value, the proposed Dieselgate settlement initially seemed like it might provide the monumental boost to public electric vehicle charging infrastructure that many have been waiting for. The Volkswagen Group has agreed to pay $14.7 billion for intentionally deceiving the public, and selling “Clean Diesel” vehicles that emit up to 40 times the legal limit of certain pollutants. There are three parts to the settlement:

• Buybacks and financial settlements to owners of 466,000 affected vehicles: $10.0 billion

• Compensation for the illegal cars' environmental impact: $2.7 billion

• Fund new infrastructure and access for zero-emission vehicles: $2.0 billion

However, as the October 18th court date approaches at which time U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer is set to decide whether to grant final approval to the settlement, the details of the infrastructure part of the settlement are, to say the least, concerning.

As it stands now, the Volkswagen Group will have little oversight as to how they spend the 2 billion dollars earmarked for infrastructure and improving access to ZEVs. (CARB will be reviewing and approving the California projects and the EPA will be doing the same for the rest of the country) I question why Volkswagen will have ANY discretion as to how the penalty funds are spent, let alone near complete control over it. Volkswagen isn’t in the electric vehicle infrastructure business. In fact, they are barely in the electric vehicle business as it is today. The only OEM that I’d actually trust to do infrastructure implementation properly would be Tesla, because their business model depends on it, and they’ve been doing it very successfully for half a decade already.

What if Volkswagen decides to start their own EV infrastructure company and use the funds to pay their own subsidiary to manufacture and install the equipment? (*EDIT: I've since read the full proposed transcript and I don't believe they could actually do this, so that's one good thing) We could end up with substandard equipment, and a network that has poor customer service, inadequate repairs and outrageous pricing models. Even if they were to do it right, and the company was successful, why should Volkswagen benefit from the penalty? What if they offered free charging for the first couple years so they could put all the competition out of business and then raised the prices to unreasonable levels? Indeed, you could do a lot of damage with 2 billion dollars and this settlement doesn’t provide any safeguards against that in its current form.

A ChargePoint DC Fast charger rapidly filling up my BMW i3s battery

Last week ChargePoint asked the courts to intervene, and Judge Breyer accepted the plea. It’s ChargePoint’s position that the way the settlement is currently constructed, Volkswagen is “solely responsible for every aspect of selecting the National (ZEV) investments…including timing and locations”. Among concerns that Volkswagen isn’t experienced enough in the electric vehicle infrastructure business to have sole discretion over sure a large fund, Chargepoint is also concerned that Volkswagen will have too much say over the future of electric vehicle charging. Since the amount of funds available in the fund is so great, Volkswagen could dictate the fate of many of the existing companies and decelerate advancements, often fostered by fair competition: “If the settling defendants become the sole source for electric vehicle infrastructure, it will stifle innovation in industries designed to support electric vehicle recharging.”

I have to agree with Chargepoint on this issue. I don’t believe it’s in the best interest of the electric vehicle industry to allow Volkswagen to have sole discretion over how to spend these funds.

Personally I’m not rooting for ChargePoint over Car Charging Group, or for EVGo over Greenlots, etc. I believe the market will sort that out, and eventually the stronger networks which provide the best equipment and customer service will emerge as the dominant forces. However, the enormity of this settlement could have the opposite effect, and allow VW to crush the competition before the natural evolution and survival of the fittest has time to take effect. If the stronger companies of today aren’t even allowed to bid on projects funded by this penalty, they could end up dying before they have the chance to flourish and provide the marketplace with superior products and services.

I’d like to see an independent council appointed to oversee the infrastructure fund implementation, so as to not skew the marketplace. There should be appointees from various industry stakeholders, EV advocacy groups, like Plug in America, The Sierra Club, Clean Cities Coalitions, etc. Let the council decide how the money is spent and always offer open, competitive bidding taking in consideration more factors than simply the lowest bid. The council will be much more effective than Volkswagen could ever be, and we'll probably get more robust equipment and better customer service as a result.

Volkswagen should not have near complete control over the money they were fined. They’ve proven beyond any reasonable doubt that they cannot be trusted when it comes to clean air initiatives. There’s too much at stake here. We have an opportunity to really advance the proliferation of electric vehicle charging infrastructure in the US, and provide the industry with a much-needed boost. This settlement should be modified to allow competitive bidding for all projects, to follow a master plan for national electric vehicle DC fast charging, and to add proper oversight and transparency.

The 2014 (60Ah) i3 REx vs The 2017 (94Ah) i3 REx

255 miles of combined range? This range estimator is probable a little more optimistic than real life, but I definitely believe 200 miles is possible with the new 2017 i3 REx. 

What a difference three years makes.  I was able to secure one of the first 2017 BMW i3 REx cars that made its way into US dealer inventory, compliments of Chris Chang, Sales Manager at BMW of Bloomfield here in New Jersey. The vehicle is mostly the same as my 2014 i3 REx, the one big exception is it has the new 94 Ah battery cells, which increase the overall battery capacity from 21.6 kWh to 33 kWh without increasing its physical size. That was necessary, since this isn't a redesigned i3, so the battery modules had to fit in the existing battery tray.

The 2017 i3 REx in Fluid Black next to my "Moloughney Red" wrapped 2014 i3 REx

As much as I wanted to check out the moonroof option that this car had (finally the moonroof is available in the US!), there is no denying the single most important improvement I was interested in was to find out how much more range the new model has. The EPA range rating for the 2017 i3 REx is 97 miles per charge, and BMW claims 180 miles of total range when combined with the added miles from the range extender. The full 2.4 gallons of gas is now available for the REx. Previously it was software limited to only 1.9 gallons so the vehicle would qualify as a BEVx vehicle. My 2014 i3 REx has an EPA rating of 72 miles per charge, and BMW claimed a total range of 150 miles including the range extender miles. So the new i3 REx should offer about 35% more all-electric range, if the EPA test results are accurate. One thing to note is the auto manufacturers do the range testing in house, and reports it to the EPA. I think many people are under the assumption that the EPA tests the cars, and they do not. Manufacturers have been known to "massage" these numbers to fit their needs.

Range Testing

I wanted to perform three tests. The first was to fully charge the car and drive it easy. I didn't hypermile, but I took it a little easier than I usually drive. It was 83 degrees, which is favorable for good range, but I did have the A/C on the entire time. I drove in Comfort Mode because that's pretty much the only mode I ever drive in. I took a combination of highway and secondary roads and basically drove the speed limit with moderate acceleration from stops.

After 100 miles of driving, the car still had 26% state of charge and was estimating an additional 37 miles available. I've driven my i3 long enough to know how far it can go, within a couple miles, and I'm sure if I were driving my i3 in those same conditions it would have gone about 72 to 76 miles before the range extender would have needed to turn on. This new i3 REx easily beat the 35% range increase expected by the EPA range rating. In fact, based on these results I think it would be hard for me to get less than 100 miles per charge even if I tried. So that's what I did for the next test.

This time I was going to drive it harder. Not Autocross hard mind you, but I'd punch it from all the stops, drive 75 - 80 mph on the highway and not concern myself with using the regenerative braking to their fullest advantage. Basically, I'd drive like I was late to an important meeting. Halfway through, I realized my efforts weren't making much of a difference. At 50% SOC I had driven 62 miles and the range estimator still showed 62 miles to go. I did noticed that the gas range estimate had dropped from 85 miles to 75 miles though, even without using any. That's because my driving efficiency was much worse than it had been on the first 100 mile drive.

Seeing how I was still on my way to 120+ miles of range, I stepped up my assault on the tires, and really thrashed the car around a bit. It worked, and I further reduced my efficiency. I finished up this 100 mile trip with only 13.5% SOC and estimated 16 miles remaining. I was able to reduce the single charge range by 21 miles, but I couldn't manage to get less than 100 miles of range, which was my goal. In my opinion this is great news. Honestly, I don't know how this car is rated at 97 miles per charge; that's nearly impossible to attain unless it's being operated in cold weather or perhaps being driven at a very high rate of speed. I'm sure once the winter months roll in and the temperature drops it won't be hard to get less than 100 miles of electric range. However in moderate temperatures, I think most people will always be in triple digits. Based on the experience with my car, I'm guessing this new i3 REx will probably average about 85 to 90 miles of all electric range in the winter. My car only averages about 60 to 65 miles of electric range when the temperatures are below 30 degrees Farenheight, therefore 85 to 90 miles sounds about right for this new, longer range model.

Even with trying to get less than 100 miles, I still managed 100 plus an estimated 16 miles remaining. 

The REx Test

The final test was to see if the range extender performance was any different. Much has been made over the fact that the i3 REx can enter Reduced Power mode, and slow down under certain strenuous driving conditions. So I depleted the battery, drove it for 50 miles and made sure to take it up some hill climbs at highway speeds. The first thing I noticed is the range extender operates the exact same way as it always has. It doesn't turn on until the battery state of charge reaches 6.5%. The "Hold State of Charge" option is still disabled here in the US, so if you want that feature, it will still have to be unlocked by coding the vehicle, as before. There was some speculation that the automatic turn on point of the REx might be at a higher SOC with the new model, but I can confirm that's not the case. However, there were two observations that I noticed that were positive.

First, the range extender seemed quieter from inside the cabin. In my car, the REx motor is pretty quiet and unnoticeable until it kicks into it's highest output mode. At that point you can definitely hear the scooter engine revving up high from underneath the rear seats. It's kinda like you're being chased by lawnmower. On long highway trips it will operate at its highest level for most of the journey and the noise is noticeable. I'll usually turn the radio up a notch to cancel it out. With this new car, driving at a constant 75 mph to 80 mph the motor seemed much quieter than it does on mine. My wife was with me for part of this test and she also noticed. She actually asked me if the REx was even running. It seems to me that BMW improved the REx soundproofing. It does sound just as loud as before from outside the vehicle, but it's definitely quieter on the inside.

Secondly, (and I've reached out to BMW for confirmation on this but haven't received a response yet) it does seem like the REx motor has been tuned for a slightly higher output. I took the vehicle on highway roads that I drive on regularly, and have on occasion done so when the REx was operating. The range extender was able to hold the state of charge higher, and under more strenuous driving conditions than my 2014 REx can. There's one particular long incline that I drive every day. With my car, if I start at the bottom with 6% SOC and drive 70 mph up to the top I'll deplete the battery to about 2.5%. I did this same test with the 2017 car and I reached the top of the climb with 5% SOC remaining. I repeated the climb with the same results. I also noticed that I could drive at about 75 mph on flat ground and maintain the 6% SOC. My car can maintain the SOC on flat ground with a constant 70 - 72 mph, but not any higher or the charge will slowly deplete.

I know the 6.5% buffer is now larger, because it's holding 6.5% of 30 kWh instead of 6.5% of about 19 kWh, so that extra energy is definitely helping, but to me it appears that the REx motor has a higher output for the 2017 model. The REx motor in my car is rated at maximum power output of 28 kW. I wouldn't be surprised it we find out the power has been increased to about 33 kW, but I don't have any official confirmation on that. I'm just going on what I've experienced with the previous REx cars and how this new one compared to it. Another hint that I may be correct is the REx is now rated at 35 mpg, down from the 39 mpg which the previous models were rated at. I don't think the extra 170 lbs alone would cause a loss of 4 mpg. I believe it working harder now to produce more energy, which was I'm guessing was achieved through a software adjustment.

After driving 42 miles on the highway I still had 70.5% SOC and an estimates 93 miles or range remaining. My 2014 i3 REx doesn't even go 93 miles per charge!  The range of the 2017 is a substantially greater than previous i3s, even more than the EPA rating would seem to advertise.  

Faster Charging With A New Profile

Previous model year i3s were capable of charging at 30amps which, at 240 volts, gave a maximum draw of 7.2 kW. The new i3s can accept 32 amps which translates to 7.4 kW. Not a huge difference, but it can help if you're waiting for the car to charge to a certain SOC so you can unplug and drive. I should note that most public charging stations are limited to 30 amps, so it won't make a difference on those units. However at home, I have charging stations that can deliver 32 amps so I was able to monitor the difference. My car usually accepts 7.1 to 7.2 kW (depending on the voltage supply) but this new i3 was consistently drawing 7.3 kW to 7.4 kW, so I can confirm the onboard charger upgrade.

The charging profile of my 2014 i3 REx is on the left, and the 2017 i3 Rex is on the right. 

Both charged from 6.5% to 100%. The 2014 car charges fully in about 3.5 hours and the 2017 in about 4.5 hours.

I did observe something interesting while monitoring the charging profile of the new i3. Instead of the charge rate gradually tapering off as the SOC reached 90%, and slowing down for the final 40 minutes of charging, this car took the maximum rate nearly right up to the end of the session. I charged it three times to monitor this and it behaved the same way all three times. I've never observed this on any other EV. Normally, the vehicle slows down the charging rate considerably as it approaches the end of the session to slowly balance the cells. This takes place once the vehicle is over 90% and the final 5% to 10% of charging takes much longer than charging at lower SOC. That's not happening with this vehicle. It only slows down slightly, and only for a couple minutes at the very end. The charging rate doesn't gradually lower until it shuts off, it more closely resembles falling off a cliff. Interesting.

Finally, a Moonroof

This is fully opened

The moonroof is a new option for the US. It's been available all along for i3s outside of North America, and now it's available here also. The moonroof is a $1,000 option and is a split version, having two openings separated by a solid center section. Each opening has its own manually-operated sunscreen, but the moonroof itself is one piece, and slides back with a push of a button. However it only opens about eight inches, slightly more than half of the actual opening in the roof. It's not even large enough to stick your head out of it - not that you would want to do that; but the point is, it's a small opening. The moonroof does accomplish two things, though. It allows more light in the cabin, giving the feeling of it being more open. It also allows you to eliminate side window buffeting by simply tilting the moonroof open.



Available Battery Capacity - Surprise!

BMW states that the new battery is 33 kWh, and 27 kWh of that is usable. That's only 81.8%  of the total pack, much less than the ~90% they allowed to be accesses on the 60 Ah battery pack. When I read that I wondered if it was perhaps sign that the new 94 Ah cells were less tolerant to deep discharge than the 60 Ah cells were, so BMW was going to be conservative with them. So when I fully charged the battery after the first 100 mile test run, I checked the hidden diagnostic menu and to my surprise it was showing a full 30 kWh accessible. So BMW is allowing access to roughly 90% of the overall pack, just like they do with the 60 Ah cells. That explains the extra range I've witnessed but it doesn't explain why BMW's official stance is that there is only 27 kWh accessible. Perhaps it's for battery capacity warranty claims?

While the "Batt.Kapa.Max" isn't an exact measurement of the available capacity, but it is very close. Close enough to prove there's much more than the 27 kWh that BMW claims is available.

Gained Some Pounds

The only negative I've found is that the new battery is heavier, and adds 170 lbs to the curb weight (3,064 lbs to 3,234 lbs). This does effect performance a bit. The car doesn't feel quite as responsive as my 2014 does. Without testing the performance times, I'd say it's probably close to a half a second slower from 0 to 60 mph. Handling didn't seem quite as crisp as mine either, but that might not be this car's fault. It has the 19" turbine wheels, and my i3 the 20" wheels with the sport tires, which are wider and have a larger contact patch. I also recently lowered my car with sport springs from H&R which have improved the handling, so it's not fair to compare the handling to my car.

My i3 before and after installing the H&R Sport springs. It dropped the car 1" in the front and .8" in the rear.

The other performance change I noticed is the regenerative braking seems to be blended in differently. When driving slowly, it seems pretty much the same as my car does. However at higher speeds the car will coast more when releasing the accelerator. The regenerative braking doesn't initially come on as aggressively as is does on my car. It will get progressively stronger if you continue to coast, but initially upon releasing the accelerator, the car freewheels a lot more than previous versions do. I like this for highway driving, as freewheel coasting improves efficiency. If you slightly depress the friction brake pedal, the friction brakes aren't used, instead the car used first uses only regenerative braking, until you depress the brake pedal harder.

Summing Up

After a couple days and driving over 300 miles I feel it's safe to say that I believe most people will find the average usable range greater than the EPA rating of 97 miles per charge. I almost wonder if BMW purposely underestimated the range a bit in an effort to under-promise and over-deliver. On my 2014 i3 REx, I've found the range to be pretty close to the EPA rated range of 72 miles per charge. I do average a few miles more than that during the warmer months, and about 10 miles less per charge during the winter when it's cold. But this new i3 has unexpectedly trounced the EPA range rating by a healthy margin. I think most people should average well over 100 miles of pure electric range on these vehicles. The range increase will undoubtedly push some people deciding on whether to go BEV or REx into the BEV camp. I know if I were buying one today I'd go BEV also. Getting this kind of range with the REx, I'm certain 125 to 140 miles per charge would be easy to attain with the 2017 BEV. That, combined with the ever increasing CCS DC fast charge networks, would really be all I need for all my driving needs.










Thanks again to Chris Chang and BMW of Bloomfield for providing me with the use of this car for three days of testing.

VW: Das-eption and the path to Redemption

Volkswagen CEO Martin Winterkorn resigned on Wednesday.

While this blog's primary focus is the BMW i3, I occasionally sprinkle in some featured EV products and discuss topics not necessarily i3-centric, but are instead just general electric vehicle information. In light of the recent revelations that Volkswagen has been deliberately cheating on emissions testing for many years now, I wrote the following article for Green Car Reports.

So far, no other automaker has been caught as VW has - with proof that they purposely installed a "defeat device" on the vehicles so the cars would curb their emissions only during actual emission testing. However it's fair game to speculate if other OEMs may also be exposed as cheaters now that the EPA knows what they have to look for, and how to expose it. It will certainly be interesting to watch this all unfold.

In any event, Volkswagen is going to face huge fines for intentionally violating Federal emission standards and I wanted to offer my thoughts on how I believe some of that money should be used. If we don't use at least a portion of that money to help reverse the damage done by these heavily polluting "clean diesels", I believe we will have missed a great opportunity to improve the quality of air we all breathe.

 How VW Can Atone For Diesel Deception: Electric-Car Advocate's Thoughts

The full impact of Volkswagen's diesel-emission cheating scandal has yet to be realized, but what it has apparently already admitted to doing could result in the largest civil fine ever levied by the Federal government on an automaker. And that's just the beginning.

Besides paying civil penalties, and coping with a spate of criminal actions, and class-action lawsuits, and investigations by multiple levels of government, VW also needs to deal with the 482,000 cars it sold--plus more in limbo at dealers--that clearly do not comply with emission laws.

In real-world use, these vehicles emit 10 to 35 times the allowable legal limit of certain pollutants, so they're not just slightly out of compliance. They will need to be modified to comply, or VW will have to buy them back. And if owners don't like the modified cars, they'll likely have to buy those cars back too.
After all that, VW has to figure out how to regain the trust of the public.

There are lots of aspects to this debacle, and all will undoubtedly be discussed ad nauseam over the coming weeks. But the aspect I find most interesting is how Volkswagen can best right the wrongs it has done. How does paying fines, settling lawsuits, and bringing highly-polluting vehicles into compliance really undo the damage done? It doesn't. All it does is punish Volkswagen. And I believe the public deserves more.

Make no mistake: If VW is guilty as charged, it absolutely deserves to be punished--and severely.

It turns out they aren't as clean as we were told - not nearly, actually.

But I hope the Justice Department also considers what can be done to offset the damage to air quality created by the offending so-called "clean diesels." And I hope VW, separately, does the same. We've seen penalty estimates as high as $18 billion dollars (the maximum allowed of $37,500 per vehicle for intentionally violating the Clean Air Act. I doubt the actual penalty will be anywhere close to that, but it will likely be in the billions. I think it's not unreasonable to expect the fine to be somewhere around $2.5 billion, or about $5,000 per non-compliant vehicle sold.

Why not use a portion of that civil fine to invest in a nationwide DC Fast Charge network for electric vehicles?

If just half of a $2.5 billion fine were dedicated to this purpose, we could blanket the majority of Interstate highways and major high-traffic corridors with DC fast chargers that would make switching from gasoline and diesel cars to zero-emission electric vehicles a much easier decision for many buyers. Here's why I believe that is what should be done. Helping to advance the proliferation of cleaner electric vehicles would, over time, more than reverse the emissions damage that has been done, and further improve the quality of air we breathe, instead of just punishing the offender. And shouldn't that really be the goal here?

A second thought: As well as using the fine to build out a national DC fast-charging network, how about Volkswagen getting out in front of this crisis itself and telling us how it will do its part to help clean the air it polluted?

BMW, Volkswagen and ChargePoint teamed up to create "Express Charging Corridors" on the East and West coasts. While it's a good start, much more fast charge infrastructure is needed to allow the average electric car of today to be a viable choice for long distance driving.

Rather than just declaring that it will be a leader in electric mobility, as the company has done before, show us the proof that it's serious about how it plans to expand its zero-emission vehicle offerings? VW Group could combine that with a generous investment in public charging infrastructure, on a much greater scale than last December's partnership with BMW and ChargePoint to install approximately 100 DC fast chargers.

That program in just now starting to get under way, but it's really only the beginning of what's needed. VW should commit to expanding it to 400 or 500 stations, including high-volume corridors not only on the East and West coasts but across the country--essentially following the Tesla Supercharger road map.

Tesla North American Supercharger map.

Yet another idea to consider: Give the owners of the affected vehicles the option to replace their car with a new electric Volkswagen e-Golf. Some current Volkswagen TDI diesel owners have said they now feel guilty for having driven their diesel for the past few years, with a main reason for their purchase having been both fuel economy and because it was a "clean" diesel.

Offering those owners the option to return the polluting car for a much cleaner Volkswagen could demonstrate that VW understands and is concerned with its customers' desire to drive clean cars. Many owners won't take advantage of such an offer--diesel partisans can be just as committed to their technology as electric-car advocates--but the offer would send a powerful signal about the company's intent. I believe these are the sort of things Volkswagen must consider if it wants to convince the public it is serious about making proper restitution for this egregious deception.

How about offering eGolfs to the customers that don't want their dirty diesel anymore?

There are plenty of ways to make some good come out of this shameful episode. No matter how you slice it, it will be very painful for Volkswagen AG. How well or poorly the company manages this crisis will  have a lingering effect for years to come, even decades.

It appears VW intentionally deceived both the American consumer and the U.S. government, and put public health at risk, by knowingly planning and executing a fraud. To me, and I think to many others, that's much worse than a carmaker trying to delay or prevent a vehicle recall.

But Americans are forgiving people, and sin followed by redemption is a part of our national myth. As long as we believe the offender is genuinely remorseful for what it did, and is taking steps to prove it hase learned from the offense, recovery is possible--perhaps even lauded and held up as a shining example of redemption.

Now that we've found out the real truth in German engineering, the ball has moved into VW's court to decide on what it can do to begin to offset the damage it has done to itself, its customers, and the environment.
Let's hope Volkswagen is smart enough to make the right decisions.

*Edit: BMW released a statement regarding the recent discussion of diesel engines and emission compliance. You can read it HERE.

Born Electric Guest Blogger: Meet Harold From California

My name is Harold and I was born electric on August 19^th, 2014. 

There are two parts to my story here. The first is about my path to selecting and buying the i3, and the second is about my experiences owning and driving the i3.

PART 1:  

“IF YOU’RE NOT PART OF THE SOLUTION, THEN YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM.”

When it comes to global warming, I’m embarrassed to say that for far too long my wife and I were part of the problem.  We’re a two car family, and over the years we’ve driven a series of big, luxury, premium fuel guzzlers. As recently as 2007 we each had one of the full-size Range Rovers. Yikes, and yuck!

I gradually realized this was not tenable, but I found it very, very hard to give up the comfort (I’m 6’3 and don’t fit in most cars) and sportiness of a big luxury SUV. The very thought of shoehorning myself into the ugly and painfully boring Prius hybrid was enough to make me puke.

So my first tentative step in the right direction was to sign up to make annual contributions to one of those carbon-offset charities. I even got vanity license plates that said “I OFFSET.” Wow, how big and how brave of me!

Then BMW came out with a diesel version of their X5 so I dumped my Range Rover in favor of that on the theory that at least I would be burning a lot less fuel. As nice a car as the X5 was, it ended up only getting about 16mpg, and I also came to understand that the diesel wasn’t as clean as I had thought it might be.

Meanwhile, there were more hybrid cars coming on the market, but all still seemed to frumpy for me.  I’m sorry, but I live in California and I spend a ton of time in my car and I want it to look and feel great!

And then Audi launched their stylish little Q5, and I dumped the X5 in favor of this smaller, more fuel efficient vehicle. But even that only got around 20mpg. 

So about a year ago I started the search for my next car. I did my first exploration of EV’s. The RAV4 was too clearly a Toyota. The Leaf, which a neighbor of mine happily drives, drove like a turtle to me.  The Volt was claustrophobic – and a Chevy to boot. The Tesla was way cool, but I actually don’t fit very well in it and, at least in the San Francisco area, driving one has already become interpreted as a sign that you are an obnoxious snob.

So, I had resigned myself to getting the new edition of the X5 diesel, which promised to deliver significantly better – and cleaner – mileage than the original one. And then one day while I was checking out the new X5 on one of the BMW forums, I saw something about the coming of the i3. It looked weird as hell in the photo, but it sounded intriguing. I started to follow stories about it. 

I went to a car show in San Jose to see it in person. I fully expected to discover that I could not fit in it, but when I sat down in the model on display I discovered that it had more head room and leg room and better visibility than my Q5. (Of course at this point, BMW was showing it with a sunroof – more about that later….). Plus, the interior design was stunning. And the exterior, while weird, was weird in a sexy way.  So I was hooked.

When the test drives started happening in the Bay Area, I went to them at three different dealers.  Driving the car was a total blast (all the more so with the sunroof open…..) and I had to have one. I went to my dealer and said I’m willing to pay MSRP for one of the first ones you get, I just need to get two key options – the sun roof and the REX. Can you arrange that please?

And then things started to fall apart. For one, it turned out the sunroof was not going to be offered in the US.  No reason for this has ever been provided, but that alone was enough to put me off.  I’m claustrophobic, and I always felt I needed a sunroof to have the feeling of openness they give. And then some negative stories started to appear about the REX – a review in Europe said driving with the REX was like driving in limp-home mode, and then it was revealed that the REX was being modified in the US in ways that made it seem even less desirable.  And,  being new to EV’s, I was at that point too chicken to go the full BEV route.

So, I abandoned my quest for an i3. I signed off of the i3 forums and facebook group. I went back to my dealer and started haggling over prices on the X5 diesel again. But the x5 diesel remained in hot demand,  and I couldn’t get what I thought was a reasonable price. And then the i3’s actually arrived. I saw two in one day “in the wild.” I went behind my dealer’s back and went to another dealer to test drive an i3 again.  I found that even without the sunroof it still felt very open. And it was just as fun to drive as I had remembered. 

So I went back to my CA, said you’re not going to believe this, but I want the i3 after all. He laughed very heartily. We worked the numbers for a while. I ended up doing the two year version of “owner’s choice.” (Went with owner’s choice vs. lease to get the full advantage of the federal tax credit,  and went two years rather than three just because I expect the EV technology is going to advance pretty rapidly over the next couple of years and I may want to move to the next edition sooner rather than later.) And within just a few weeks I was driving my new Andesite Silver Terra i3, loaded up with everything except for the 20” wheels.  And, surprise surprise, I even got over my fear of running out of juice and went with the BEV instead of the REX.

PART 2: 

“WHO SAYS MEDICINE HAS TO TASTE BAD TO BE GOOD FOR YOU?

As I mentioned earlier, a key factor that kept me from switching sooner to a more environmentally correct car was that they all just seemed too ugly, too uncomfortable, and too boring. I wanted to do the right thing for the planet – but I wanted to still be able to enjoy driving at the same time.

Thankfully, my i3 has solved all three of those problems for me. 

While I will admit that the exterior is a bit of an acquired taste, there can be no denying that the interior is stunning. Yes, the materials are all very environmentally friendly, but more important to me – they are gorgeous. The design is very fresh,  very high tech,  and yet very simple. Among the features I like most are the floating high definition screens (one for the instrument cluster stuff, one for the navigation and multimedia stuff) and the eucalyptus dash. I also really appreciate the openness of the cabin and the great sight lines.

The interior is also quite comfortable. I was initially skeptical about the thinness of the seats.  As a veteran business road warrior, I have equated the steady thinning down of airline seats over the years with an equally steady decline in the comfort of those seats. Well, I can only hope that the designers at Boeing and Airbus get to drive an i3 soon so they can see how to make a thinner seat super supportive and comfortable.

And as for the driving experience, well, I haven’t had so much fun driving a car since the very first one I owned.  First comes the peppiness. As the folks at BMW are fond of saying,  the i3 is the fastest car they make from 0 to 30 mph.  And I believe them now!  Zipping in and out of city traffic is as easy as can be – aided by how tight the turning radius is. Likewise, accelerating on to freeway ramps and passing at freeway speeds is also quick and easy. When we had a meet up of Bay area i3 drivers recently,  I had t-shirts printed up for everyone that carried this message: “I drive a BMW i3.  So you can eat my dust, not my exhaust. You’re welcome.” Trust me, the message is appropriate: this car hauls ass.

It's hard to see in the picture, but the blue T-Shirts everyone is wearing are the shirts Harold made up for the Crissy Field i3 meet. He was even gracious enough to send me a couple in the mail. Photo credit: Dino Ignacio

The steering is also very tight. I’m sure it has some degree of electronic assistance, but it doesn’t feel in the least bit mushy or vague. If anything it’s too responsive – you have to be attentive or it’s a bit too easy to oversteer.

The ride is firm, but in a good, BMW way. If you don’t want to feel the road at all, then this is not the car for you. But if you like to get some feedback from your driving, you should like this.

I really like the quietness of the car. If you keep the windows rolled up, it is super quiet; there is of course some wind noise at higher speeds, but I have not found it to be objectionable. And, at the same time, if you drive with the windows open, you can actually hear the sounds of nature!

I’m still learning all the fancy new tech tools.  Love the Harman Kardon stereo, love being able to use apps like Pandora and TuneIn. Appreciate that iDrive has gotten clearer and more manageable, though it still requires a learning curve. Love the collision avoidance system and the adaptive cruise control.  Haven’t yet tried the self-parking thing – but haven’t felt the need either, as this is the smallest car I have driven in ages and I would feel like a total wimp if I couldn’t park it by myself.  : )

As for downsides of the i3, anyone who buys this car has to accept that they are on the bleeding edge of technology and that things may go wrong. And they have for some of the early owners. But, knock on wood, after just about 1,000 miles, the worst thing that has happened to me so far is that one morning while I was driving along a nearly empty six lane freeway a warning message popped up on my screen that said something about “Danger – objects detected in roadway.” There were no objects to be seen, so I ignored the message and kept on driving and the message ultimately disappeared.

Also, if you choose as I did to go with the BEV instead of the REx, you will probably find yourself being more than a little bit paranoid about monitoring how much charge you have left. I have been running somewhere around 75 miles per full charge – a little less than what the EPA says, but then I drive with a bit of a lead foot and I leave the AC on all the time. So far I’ve only once gotten the dreaded verbal warning “you have 15 miles of range left,” and thankfully that happened when I was only about a mile from my house.

One other downside is that, to my way of thinking, the i3 is not practical as a family car. The “suicide”  doors (aka coach doors) make access to the back seat just too awkward for regular use, especially if you are trying to cope with child seats.

OK, so the i3 is good looking, it’s comfortable, and it’s fun to drive. But how does it do on my original overall reason for getting it, which is to help address the problem of global warming?

Well,  for one thing I have not been to a gas station since I got the car. And will never have to go to a gas station with it. Take that, Exxon and BP and the rest of you big oil companies! (The vanity plates I have on order for my car will read: “I86DGAS”) And, at least according to the i3 mobile app, so far I have already saved 530 pounds of CO2 from being pumped out into the air.

So,  in sum, thank you BMW for giving birth to the i3 so that I can at last do my part for solving global warming – but do it in a way that fits my own selfish needs for style, comfort, and fun!

PS- The i3 may not be right for everyone, but there are now plenty of EV’s on the market – surely one of them will be right for you!
_________________________________________________________




Thanks for participating Harold! If you drive an i3 and want to share your Born Electric story here, just send me an email and we'll set it up! tom.moloughney@gmail.com

BMW i3: The Emperor of Efficiency

After a recent 62 mile round trip I finished with a 5.0 mi/kWh consumption rating. I've never achieved such a low consumption rate on any other EV that I have driven. This translates to an astounding 200 Wh's per mile!

When the EPA range and efficiency figures were announced couple months ago, the i3 became the most efficient vehicle available in America. Here in the US, the EPA uses "MPGe" as its official efficiency metric to compare the energy consumption of alternative fuel vehicles. That stands for "miles per gallon equivalent", and unfortunately most people don't really understand what it means or how that really translates to what the vehicle will cost them to operate. The consumption rate, or how many miles the car will travel on one kilowatt of electricity, (mi/kWh) is a metric that I, and many other electric vehicle owners prefer to use.

i3 BEV EPA ratings

Wikipedia describes the MPGe rating as follows:
"The ratings are based on EPA's formula, in which 33.7 kilowatt hours of electricity is equivalent to one gallon of gasoline, and the energy consumption of each vehicle during EPA's five standard drive cycle tests simulating varying driving conditions."
The BEV i3 received a combined (city and highway) MPGe rating of 124 miles and the i3 REx (like I have) achieved a combined score of  117 miles. I'm not a huge fan of this rating system because all it really does is compare the efficiency of my car to the energy in a gallon of gas. One of the problems with that though, is gasoline engines are very inefficient, and only around 25% of that energy is harnessed to propel the vehicle. The rest is simply wasted. The MPGe metric isn't completely useless though. It does offer a standard rating system to compare all electric cars side by side, and it also calculates the energy use of the vehicle including the charging losses, meaning it is a true "wall to wheels" energy rating. So for a comparison tool, it has its merits.

Two days of combined driving with no real effort to drive efficiently at all. About 60% highway @ ~70mph and 40% secondary roads, with the air conditioning on the entire time and driving in comfort mode.

I've only driven about 1,500 miles so far, but I'm seeing energy consumption figures that I have never achieved on any other electric vehicle that I have driven (And I've pretty much driven them all by now!). Overall, I'm averaging about 4.5 miles per kWh and can easily attain 5 miles per kWh if I make an effort to. Five miles per kWh translates to an extremely low 200 Watt-hours per mile! For comparison, I averaged about 3.6 miles per kWh in my ActiveE under the same driving conditions and ambient temperatures under which I have been driving my i3. I had to really try hard to average 4 miles per kWh with the ActiveE, and with the i3 I would have to intentionally try hard not to do so. Based on the EPA figures I knew it was going to be a tremendously efficient car, but seeing it first hand has been an eye opening experience.

I'm sure I can push the consumption rate up to around 6 miles per kWh if I drive in Eco Pro+ mode, watch my speed and use the regenerative brakes to their full potential. But for now I'm having too much fun getting to know the car. Mashing the accelerator and feeling the instant torque every now and then is difficult to refrain from, but at some point I'll do a real efficiency test and see how low I can go. Now that I've had the car for about a month, I'm starting to get some followers message me ask what I like and don't like about it. I just want to say I have indeed been compiling a "likes and dislikes" list and I have just about enough info for a comprehensive initial review. That will most likely be the next post here so stay tuned. :)

"Monroney Hold" Has Hundreds of Range Extended i3s in Limbo

i3s lined up at the port in New Jersey

For a little over a month now, cargo ships from Bremerhaven, Germany have been arriving weekly at the port in New Jersey to unload anywhere from dozens to hundreds of shiny new i3s. My i3 arrived last week on the Fedora, which left Germany back on April 30th. Back when I learned it was booked on the Fedora and would arrive here on  May 15th, I assumed that by the 20th or 21st of May, I'd be at the dealer signing the paperwork and driving my i3 home. I was wrong.

The BEV i3s Monroney label

I now have no idea when I'll be getting my car, and neither do the hundreds of other people that ordered an i3 with the range extender and whose cars are currently here in the US sitting at a port somewhere. Officially the holdup is a "Monroney Hold" - the fact that the EPA certification has not been completed so BMW doesn't have a Monroney label (window sticker) to post in the window before the car leaves the port, which is required by law. The range extender option changes (shortens) the car's electric range, and also requires an official MPG rating so BMW couldn't use the same Monroney label as they did for the all electric i3. The i3 REx would need to be fully tested and certified as a completely different car. To make matters worse, the majority of i3's sold in the US have the range extender option. For example, my client adviser Manny Antunes of JMK BMW has sold thirteen i3s so far and only two of them are the BEV version. Eleven of the thirteen have the range extender and his clients are beginning to call him frequently now, wondering when they can expect delivery. He has no information to offer other than he'll contact them as soon as he hears something from BMW - or a truck somehow magically pulls up to the dealer with a load of i3s with range extenders!

Where's mine?

BMW is indeed delivering i3s to customers now, but all of them sold so far have been the fully electric BEV i3. The i3 RExs keep arriving in the US alongside their BEV brothers, but they cannot be released and trucked to the dealerships until they have the EPA Monroney label. BMW isn't communicating the exact reason for the lack of EPA certification, but it appears to be a combination of BMW providing the EPA with the required information a little late, and the fact  that the i3 REx is different than anything the EPA has certified before so they are taking their time to make sure they get the certification right. The closest thing to the i3 REx would be the Chevy Volt, which for most of the time the gasoline engine is running is a series hybrid and only charges the battery. However under certain conditions the gasoline engine of the Volt does indeed directly power the wheels, and in those conditions it is a parallel hybrid, like a Toyota Prius. The i3 REx is the first (second actually. The Fisker Karma was also a series hybrid - thanks to reader Andrew Chiang for pointing that out to me. Fact is, I've tried to block out all memory of the Karma!) true series hybrid the EPA has ever certified and the range extender will only serve to charge the battery. I don't see why that would be a problem because to me it seems like the Volt would have been even harder to certify because it is both a series and a parallel hybrid depending on the driving conditions. In any event, BMW claims to have furnished the EPA with everything they need for certification and are cooperating with the EPA in an effort to get this issue resolved as quickly as possible.

Battery log sheet courtesy George B

This is clearly an example of a "first world problem," but those who have been waiting patiently for their car are growing anxious as the days pass and their car is simply sitting at the port and waiting for the label. Some have even wondered what the state of charge of the cars are, and if by sitting so long (some have been sitting at the port for over a month now!), have the "vampire loads" reduced the charge level to dangerously low levels? Personally I don't believe this is an issue, and I'm sure BMW is monitoring them. BMW ships the cars with only about 25% state of charge and charges them up at the port. All of the cars used for test drives had a battery log sheet in the glove box which shows BMW is certainly monitoring the SOC of all the cars from manufacture to delivery. Plus, if the i3 is anything like the ActiveE, then the car will hold the SOC very well when not in use. My ActiveE would only lose about one percent per week when sitting unused. I doubt sitting for a month or so will have any noticeable reduction in charge and unless the cars arrived with less than 10% SOC and weren't monitored and charged I doubt there is anything to worry about. However, let's hope this "Monroney Hold" gets resolved soon and BMW can begin deliveries of the i3 REx cars that are already here and waiting - and mine in particular!