Navigation bar
  Print document Start Previous page
 24 of 54 
Next page End  

  
Saving by using battery electric car (/year)Linear (Saving AudiA2)Linear (SavingAverage car)
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
Distance travelled/year (km)
Saving Average car
Saving Audi A2
Figure 13 Cost saving by using commercially available lead-acid battery technologies
in two hypothetical BEVs verses their ICE equivalent
40
To illustrate how practical this range would be in the UK, the cumulative number of trips and total distance
travelled are compared with trip length for all cars (see figure 14). Trips involving journeys less than 80km in
length cover 97% of trips and 75% of total distance travelled.  However, for commuter drivers, trips involving
journeys less than 80km in length cover 98% of trips and 88% of total distance travelled. (see figure 15). It is
therefore suggested that for some categories of motorist at least, the BEV would be a practical proposition,
especially as a second family car, however the inability to undertake all or most journey’s would still be seen as
a severe handicap.
It is worthwhile noting that the limited range of BEVs is an advantage from an environmental and traffic
planner’s viewpoint.  A criticism often made of transport improvements (such as those which increase the
convenience of driving long distances without stopping) is that they simply generate more traffic. In this respect
the limited range of the BEV is an advantage since it encourages less use.  However, most consumers and
businesses will insist on vehicles which can cover longer journeys without stopping.  We will now examine the
different approaches which can be used to overcome this problems.
                                                               
40 See ‘spreadsheet 2’  “CO2 and fuel for various vehicle configurations’ sheet ‘range vs cost electric cars”
Previous page Top Next page