Diesel, petrol, electric, hybrid... We hear all sorts of things about which energies should be preferred in a vehicle fleet that is set to become greener and greener. But how can we reconcile cost control with a real reduction in environmental impact? The answer: by taking a step back and looking at things from a practical perspective. Here's how.
Park manager: a balancing act
We know that the priority for a manager is to succeed in controlling the TCO (total cost of use) of his vehicle fleet: maintenance, energy, insurance costs, etc. To this problem is added today a major environmental challenge, pushed by public authorities with a view to the necessary energy transition. This is how on June the 11th, 2019, deputies officially ratified in the mobility orientation law (LOM) the obligation for companies to integrate at a minimum of 10% of low-emission vehicles in their fleet renewal from 2022. For light utility vehicles, the deadline is postponed to 2023. On the model of public fleets and vehicle rental companies, the law also provides for companies a gradual increase in this rate to reach 50% of renewal from 2030.
Any company managing a fleet of more than 100 vehicles is now affected by this obligation. But what do we mean by “low-emission vehicles”? These mainly concern electric vehicles, plug-in hybrids, CNG (natural gas) and hydrogen vehicles. For park managers, this represents additional costs, despite tax incentives that can range frompartial tax exemption until the acquisition aid low-emission vehicles. It is therefore a question of finding the right balance to be both economical AND ecological.
And that's not all: our historical taxation based on vehicle approval has also changed. Since the 1st of January 2019, the WLTP protocol (Worldwide harmonized Light vehicles Test Procedure) is the new procedure to evaluate fuel/battery consumption and CO emissions2 new vehicles. Its goal ? Make vehicle approvals more consistent with their actual emissions. Enough to reshuffle the cards and give park managers a little more trouble.
It's not green who believes
From an environmental point of view, vehicles have different impacts depending on their use. Let's take the very telling example of the electric vehicle: when it left the factory, it emitted 3 tonnes of CO2 more than its fossil fuel counterpart to produce its battery. Thus, when an electric vehicle is marketed, its climate impact is accelerated compared to that of a thermal vehicle. Were you aware of this? And this is all the more true since the lifespan of a battery is 10 years on average. If it needs to be changed, the CO balance2gets heavier again. The promise of a lower impact will therefore be kept depending on use. That is to say the number of kilometers traveled, the number of journeys per day, the type of journeys and in particular whether they have to drive fast (motorway) or not (city)...
Today, based on 150,000 km, an electric vehicle is considered cleaner than a thermal vehicle. Except… it depends on the number of batteries that the car will consume throughout its life. In the Ile de France region, for example, cars drive on average 7.5 km/day, or less than 3,000 km/year (according to statistics produced in 2013). We can assume that the battery will allow you to drive 30,000 km at this rate before having to be changed. In this case, it would be necessary to consume 5 batteries and recycle 4 to compare the impact of an electric vehicle with that of a thermal vehicle! So, Ademe considers the use of an electric vehicle as potentially suitable from an economic and environmental perspective if the use is intense (greater than 30 km/day):
- long daily commutes when a private vehicle is necessary in the absence of public transport;
- as part of shared fleets of company vehicles;
- for deliveries of goods in town;
- for mobility services (car sharing for example).
If on the contrary we travel 13,000 km per year, average mileage more representative of regional or rural mobility, it takes 3 years for an electric car to pollute less than a thermal car. But in these contexts, other difficulties emerge: insufficient autonomy on long journeys (several hundred km), poorly developed charging station infrastructure, home charging that is complex to implement.
These examples alone illustrate the complexity of the debate: we tend to compare the carbon footprint of vehicles over mileage. But the life cycle of electric vehicles depends on use. It is no longer a simple question of mileage: the subject is to compare the intensity of use and the type of journeys to make an informed choice. However, the realities are multiple! Result: sometimes we believe we are green… when in practice we are not.
There is no point running…
… You have to leave on time. And for good reason: things change so quickly around us. Yesterday, the CRIT'Air1 ecological sticker was only granted to petrol cars meeting Euro 5 and 6 standards. Today, it is in the process of beingextended to diesel vehicles of the same generation. Yesterday, hybrid vehicles attracted many fleet managers on paper. Today, overconsumption on extra-urban journeys is dampening enthusiasm because very often, more than 75% of consumption is made in this type of business context. And what about the fuel prices which are silently soaring, increasing the TCO of the thermal fleet…
So what do we do in practical terms? It's simple: we organise our thinking in 3 steps: measure, reduce, compensate. First, you must measure uses to determine the needs of the company. A beginner runner is not going to choose the same sneakers as a marathon runner. The same goes for developing a hight-performance car policy, where a certain level of mobility is required to choose the right type of technology. Then, we must choose the vehicles and energies adapted to the uses to reduce CO2 emissions: a bit like if you changed your telephone plan for payment on consumption! Finally, we must succeed in neutralize incompressible CO2 emissions through carbon offsetting: connected boxes and eco-driving training will be your allies in this certified approach « climate action » by the ONU.
To know more : : wenow.com or wenow.com/le-blog/
Read all the « Expert opinion » articles on the SprintProject blog
