Ballard signs non-binding MOU with WEG Industries to provide fuel cells for applications potentially ranging from public transit to mining
TM4 and Prestolite Electric Beijing forming JV for heavy-duty electric traction systems

ACEEE ranks i-MiEV as “Greenest” car in US, Civic Natural Gas ties for second with LEAF

Mitsubishi’s i-MIEV battery electric vehicle took the top spot from the Honda Civic Natural Gas on the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy’s (ACEEE) 14th annual environmental ranking. The natural gas Civic had held first place for 8 years running.

Making its model year 2012 debut on the US market, the i-MIEV earned a score of 58, the highest Green Score awarded since the rankings began in 1998. With a combined city and highway fuel economy of 112 miles per gallon equivalent, the i-MIEV outpaces all other vehicles currently sold in United States.

ACEEE 2012 “Greenest” Rankings
Make and Model Specifications Emission Standard MPG city MPG hwy Green
score
Mitsubishi I-MiEV Elec. (Li-ion) ZEV 3.8 2.9 58
Honda Civic Natural Gas 1.8L 4, auto [CNG] PZEV / Bin 2 27 38 55
Nissan LEAF Elec. (Li-ion) ZEV 3.1 2.7 55
Toyota Prius 1.8L 4, auto CVT PZEV / Bin 3 51 48 54
Honda Insight 1.3L 4, auto CVT PZEV 41 44 53
Smart fortwo Cabriolet / Coupe 1.0L 3, manual ULEV II / Bin 5 34 38 53
Scion IQ 1.3L 4, auto CVT ULEV II / Bin 5 36 37 52
Honda Civic Hybrid 1.5L 4, auto CVT PZEV / Bin 2 44 44 52
Lexus CT200H 1.8L 4, auto CVT SULEV II / Bin 3 43 40 51
Toyota Camry Hybrid LE 2.5L 4, auto CVT PZEV / Bin 3 43 39 51
Honda CR-Z 1.5L 4, auto CVT PZEV 35 39 50
Toyota Yaris 1.5L 4, manual ULEV II / Bin 5 30 38 50

Even taking into account the emissions generated from the electricity used to power the i-MIEV, it still handily outscores other vehicles on the market today.

—ACEEE lead vehicle analyst Shruti Vaidyanathan

The Honda Civic Natural Gas, despite its improved fuel economy this year, appears in second place, tied with the Nissan Leaf. Rounding out the top six are the Toyota Prius, the Honda Insight, and the Smart ForTwo. This year, hybrids dominate the “Greenest” list occupying half of all spots. Highly efficient conventional gasoline vehicles also continue to have a presence on the “Greenest” list, claiming three of the top twelve spots.

This year saw the arrival of a number of new hybrid options for drivers from Hyundai, Kia, and Infiniti, but none broke into the top twelve.

Vehicles are analyzed on the basis of a “Green Score,” a singular measure that incorporates unhealthy tailpipe emissions, fuel consumption, and emissions of gases that contribute to climate change.

This year, a number of updates were made to the Green Book methodology to more accurately estimate vehicles’ environmental impacts. These include improved emissions estimates for the vehicle manufacturing process, changes reflecting current natural gas extraction practices, and consideration of upcoming shifts in the generation mix for the electricity used to power electric cars.

The greenercars.org website also identifies top, widely-available models in each vehicle class. This “Greener Choices” list includes trucks and SUVs such as the Chevrolet Equinox, GMC Canyon, Honda Odyssey, and the Ford F-150 (FFV). Cars such as the Chevrolet Sonic-5 and Hyundai Sonata top their respective classes. Domestic manufacturers claimed five of the twelve spots.

The “Meanest” list this year sees a number of heavier light-duty vehicles, pushing out European sports cars as the highest emitters. The dirtiest vehicles for 2012 are the twin Chevrolet G3500 Express and GMC G3500 Savana cargo vans, followed by the Ford E-350 Wagon and the Bugatti Veyron sports car.

Comments

HarveyD

Has anyone noticed that 11 units in the first twelve places are from Japan? USA's manufacturers probably got 11 of the 12 worse places. The learning curve is rather slow?

SJC

It is like GM said about the PNGV cars, they are too expensive and no one will buy them. People want cheap gas in the U.S., OPEC and others are working against that. Time for a reality check on whether you really need that 6000 pound 10 mpg SUV.

HarveyD

The ideal local vehicle, to go with the as rich as or richer than the neighbor acquired mentality, used to be a 21 + ft long Cadillac gas guzzler. Then came the 8000+lbs Hummer Super gas guzzlers. Two or three years ago I saw a HUGE 4 x 4 pick-up based on a class VIII International truck. It looked much bigger than the Hummer. Both the Hummer-I and that Huge 4 x 4 seem to have disappeared. What happened?

One must admit that the current local 40+% obese drivers may not feel at ease in mini cars. It is no fun to look bigger that your car. Many people laugh went they see a 300+ lbs driver get out of a mini-car.

SJC

I don't think it is the size of the driver, I saw a 100 pound lady struggling to park a huge Lincoln Navigator SUV in a supermarket parking lot. Another petite lady was loading a few bags of groceries behind the back seat of an H2 Hummer and they barely fit.

mahonj

The Mitsubishi I-MiEV is really very small (even the US version). (We have a Fiat 500, so we are not anti small car).

I would favour the Leaf or Prius as being more reasonably sized.

Of those two, I would take the Prius as it is almost as economical and has no range problems.

SJC

I would take a Camry or Fusion hybrid, mid sized and 40 mpg. Since the Highlander is based on the Camry and the Fusion and Escape are based on the Mazda 6, you could do mid sized crossover SUVs with 4 cylinders and good hybrid drives for those inclined. Ford has decided to not do a hybrid Escape for 2013, which I believe is a mistake.

ai_vin

The Mitsubishi I-MiEV is based on the Japanese category of small vehicles called "Kei cars." According to regulations, K-Cars must be less than 3.4 metres long and 1.48 metres wide.

TexasDesert

Natural gas is no better than coal. NOAA measured a well leak of 4% around a Denver well site. This is an interesting figure because natural gas is a 25X potent greenhouse gas. You are up to 100% CO2 emission even before any burning takes place.

What a fracking deal!

ai_vin

Yes TD that is bad.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=are-natural-gas-eco-benefits-overstated

Also: "Since 1750, methane concentrations in the atmosphere have increased by more than 150%. The primary sources for the additional methane added to the atmosphere (in order of importance) are rice cultivation, domestic grazing animals, termites, landfills, coal mining, and oil and gas extraction. Anaerobic conditions associated with rice paddy flooding results in the formation of methane gas. However, an accurate estimate of how much methane is being produced from rice paddies has been difficult to obtain. More than 60% of all rice paddies are found in India and China where scientific data concerning emission rates are unavailable. Nevertheless, scientists believe that the contribution of rice paddies is large because this form of crop production has more than doubled since 1950. Grazing animals release methane to the environment as a result of herbaceous digestion. Some researchers believe the addition of methane from this source has more than quadrupled over the last century. Termites also release methane through similar processes. Land-use change in the tropics, due to deforestation, ranching, and farming, may be causing termite numbers to expand. If this assumption is correct, the contribution from these insects may be important. Methane is also released from landfills, coal mines, and gas and oil drilling. Landfills produce methane as organic wastes decompose over time. Coal, oil, and natural gas deposits release methane to the atmosphere when these deposits are excavated or drilled."

About the only bright side to methane is that its enhanced greenhouse effect is temporary - methane isn't taken out of the atmosphere by plants like CO2 is but it does get oxidized during high energy events like thunderstorms and forest fires.

SJC

Methane has a large effect for a brief period (a net lifetime of 8.4 years in the atmosphere), whereas carbon dioxide has a small effect for a long period (over 100 years).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_methane


ai_vin

Yeah but when methane gets oxidized it produces CO2 molecules, so each CH4 molecule has 25X CO2e for 8 years followed by 1 CO2e for the next 100. All together that's 310 years of greenhouse packed into 108.4.

The comments to this entry are closed.