from Eric Peters Autos

The FDA says nothing – truthful – about the drugs it pushes on behalf of the pharmaceutical industry that controls the FDA through revolving door appointments to its high offices (among other methods) so why should it be surprising that the EPA [Environmental Protection Agency] says nothing about the dishonest way electric vehicle range/mileage is advertised?

Leave that to the South Koreans – who still apparently have a regulatory apparat that isn’t a wholly owned subsidiary of the industry it regulates.

South Korea’s Fair Trade Commission (KFTC) just laid a $2.2 million fine on Tesla for “exaggerating the driving range of its cars on a single charge, their fuel-cost effectiveness compared to gasoline vehicles as well as the performance of its Superchargers,” the latter a reference to the so-called “fast” chargers that always take much longer to partially charge an EV than a gas pump takes to fill up a non-EV.

These are, of course, facts.

What’s interesting – and corollary – is the willful avoidance of addressing them, in the U.S. By the U.S. regulatory apparat. The same apparat that went medieval on VW for claiming its diesel-powered cars were “clean” when they were only 99.7 percent “clean” rather than 99.8 percent “clean” and also went after Hyundai nearly as mercilessly when the company claimed some of its cars delivered 40 miles-per-gallon when in fact they returned closer to 37.

These are heads-on-a-pin differences compared with the EV differences – such as the 50 percent reduction in actual driving range in cold weather noted by the Koreans. And by Americans (including this writer) who drove EVs over Christmas, when it got very cold. Compounded by the “fast” charger only instilling 80 percent charge – leaving the EV driver with 20 percent less charge (and so, range) to resume his (short) journey.

There is also the 50 percent-plus reduction in range that attends using an electric truck to pull a trailer only about half as heavy as its advertised maximum capacity in temperate weather (as this writer and others have reported on).

Nothing is said – by the regulatory apparat – about the effect on range (and so, on cost) of driving an EV on other than mostly level roads, as opposed to up hills – the latter often dramatically shedding range as you ascend. The apparat also tells people nothing about the shedding of charge – and so range – that takes place when the EV is inert, if it is not plugged in when it is left. This loss can be significant (this writer experienced as much as a 20 mile diminishment in range after leaving an EV unplugged – in the cold – overnight). It is like a gas-engined new car with a pinhole leak in its tank – a thing the apparat would never abide and which most buyers would probably like to have been informed about before they bought their EV.

Instead, the apparat says things like “56 MPG e” – as the window sticker reads on the ’23 Jeep Grand Cherokee 4xe this writer recently test drove. All EVs (and plug-in hybrids, like the Jeep 4xe) advertise these very impressive-sounding “MPGe” numbers, which are arrived at via a Byzantine formula that is said to result in an equivalence to the miles-per-gallon numbers we’re all familiar with – and understand.

Which are accurate – and had better be. Ask Hyundai what happens when they’re not.

The sticker says this car will go 30 miles in city driving on one gallon of gas – and 38 miles on the highway. This averages out to about 34 miles-per-gallon. If the car’s gas tank holds 15 gallons of gas, you have a very good idea how far it will go before it runs out of gas.

Read the rest