1 of 15

EPA Vehicular Emissions Study

2 of 15

Best and Worst: no surprises!

2017 Hyundai Ionic Electric

    • 150 MPG city
    • 122 MPG highway
    • 136 MPG combined

1986-1990 Lamborghini Countach

    • 6 MPG city
    • 10 MPG highway
    • 7 MPG combined
  • Supports common consumer beliefs about vehicle types, design, and fuel efficiency.
  • Supports claim that electric cars have lower highway MPG than city MPG.
  • BUT – only one example of each vehicle in the EPA dataset!

3 of 15

Limitations: sampling issues

  • Many models have only one example in data set.
  • Older cars appear more common in data set.
  • For the sake of fair comparison and relevance to contemporary automotive market, we include only vehicles manufactured from 2010-17 were considered in statistical analysis.
  • Comparisons within categories sometimes have very small sample populations. Ex: electric car brand comparisons.

Central limit theorem

4 of 15

Limitations: human factors

  • Are individual driving habits a factor?
  • Is the performance of the manufacturer consistent?
  • Did the EPA do their math correctly?

5 of 15

Limitations: time, demand, creativity

  • Myriad variables included in dataset: myriad possible tests.
    • Ignoring diesel, etc.
    • What are some of these variables (GHG score, economy score, etc)?
  • Do the magazine or its subscriber base have specific questions for us to investigate within this data set?

6 of 15

Inquiries and Hypotheses

  • Which brands produce the most gas efficient vehicles?
    • We compared Toyota and Honda, two manufacturers known for efficiency.
    • We compared within the ‘midsize cars’ category.
  • Which brands produce the most energy efficient electric cars?
    • We compared Volkswagen and Ford.
    • We compared within the ‘compact cars’ category.

​

  • Does 4 wheel drive really use more energy than 2 wheel?

​

  • Are hybrid cars really more energy efficient than gas cars?
  • Are electric cars really more energy efficient than hybrid cars?

​

​

  • All inquiries use a two sample t-test assuming unequal variances.
  • All tests operate with a null and alternative hypothesis:
    • Null – No difference in means exists between the two groups being tested
    • Alternative – a statistically significant difference between means exists.
  • All tests were done at a 95% level of confidence.

7 of 15

Handling the data

  • Data comes from a 2017 report from the Environmental Protection Agency.
  • For each test, we chose a variable from this data accordingly:
    • Test 1: Combined MPG (FT1)
    • Test 2: Combined electricity consumption
    • Test 3: Combined MPG (FT1)
    • Test 4: Annual fuel cost (FT1)
    • Test 5: Annual fuel cost (FT1)
  • We compare the means of these variables across two groups of vehicles.
  • All tests exclude vehicles before 2010, however we will include descriptive statistics of the entire data set below. This includes entries all the way back to 1984.
  • It appears that this data does not always show normal distributions as a whole, but it does when you separate categories.

Combined MPG

​

​

​

Mean

20.21607

Standard Error

0.034691

Median

19

Mode

18

Standard Deviation

6.772655

Sample Variance

45.86885

Kurtosis

66.64565

Skewness

5.732955

Range

129

Minimum

7

Maximum

136

Sum

770495

Count

38113

Annual Fuel Cost

​

​

​

Mean

1970.675

Standard Error

2.727898

Median

1950

Mode

2350

Standard Deviation

532.5552

Sample Variance

283615.1

Kurtosis

1.754519

Skewness

0.79584

Range

5550

Minimum

500

Maximum

6050

Sum

75108350

Count

38113

8 of 15

Test 1: Toyota vs Honda, gas cars

  • 95% confidence
  • Tested on midsize cars
  • Large variance within each group
    • Are personal driving habits a factor?
    • Have we come a long way since 2010?
  • Midsize cars from 2010-7 may be built for a variety of purposes and price ranges.
  • Test shows significant difference, suggesting that Toyota outperforms Honda on gas mileage.

​

Toyota

Honda

Mean

33.86076

28.95

Variance

70.32652

44.81795

Observations

79

40

Toyota: Range from 23-56 MPG (33)

Honda: Range from 21-48 MPG (27)

​

Confidence interval: 2.1-7.7 MPG

9 of 15

Test 2: Volkswagen vs Ford, electric cars

  • 95% confidence
  • Cannot slam Tesla – no comparable class vehicles by competing manufacturers!
  • Tested on compact cars
  • Severely limited sample
  • Tested for electronic fuel consumption
  • Data suggests that Volkswagen’s electric compact models are less costly to run than than those by Ford.

​

Volkswagen

Ford

Mean

29.1724

31.83333

Variance

3.362E-05

0.166667

Observations

2

6

Confidence interval: 2.2-3.1 kW-h

10 of 15

Test 3: Drivetrain and mileage

  • 95 % confidence
  • Tested on all vehicle types
  • Testing 4wd, AWD, and combined drivetrains against 2wd front-wheel and rear-wheel drive
  • Could there be further differences within these types?
  • Significant difference found, supporting the claim that supplying power to all four wheels consumes more gas, which is widely accepted as fact in the industry.

​

4WD

2WD

Mean

20.97129

24.27446

Variance

64.02165

120.1333

Observations

3204

6103

Confidence interval: 2.9-3.7 MPG

11 of 15

Test 4: Gas vs Hybrid

  • 95% confidence
  • Tested on yearly running costs
  • Tested on regular, midgrade, and premium fuel measurements vs gas and electric, gas or electric, regular and electric, regular or electric
  • Large difference in sample sizes
  • Test shows significant difference, which would support the consumer conception that hybrid cars cost less to operate than gas cars.

​

Gas

Hybrid

Mean

1827.563096

1307.692308

Variance

261357.6357

201189.9038

Observations

8281

65

Confidence interval: $408.20-$631.55

12 of 15

Test 5: Hybrid vs Electric

  • 95% confidence
  • Tested on yearly running costs
  • Tested on aforementioned hybrid types vs “electricity” fuel type
  • Surprisingly, there were more electric models included in the EPA study than hybrid models.
  • Analysis found significant difference in mean costs, suggesting that electric cars are indeed cheaper to run than hybrid cars.

​

Hybrid

Electric

Mean

1307.692308

675.4545455

Variance

201189.9038

14667.22269

Observations

65

110

Confidence Interval: $518.91-$745.56

13 of 15

Implications

  • Our findings suggest that conventional knowledge generally holds true in the car market.
  • The automotive industry as a whole is improving in being environmentally conscious.
  • Your readers are getting accurate and relevant information from your publication.
  • Everyone has “their” car and your publication can be a way for individuals to find and connect with it.

14 of 15

Further study

  • Testing within make/model over the years to see if things are improving.
  • Testing within make/model/year to determine if they are made consistently. This may also be an indicator of factory performance.
  • Testing the improvement over the years between manufacturers to see if one is beginning to eclipse the other.
  • Auditing EPA data.
  • Incorporating new data sources.
  • Is progress so fast that we need to compare vehicles within a single year? If so, we certainly need more cars to test on!
  • Technical specs:
    • Transmission type
    • Engine type
    • Correlation between emissions and fuel efficiency
    • Cargo and passenger capacity vs running expense
    • Charging times
    • Range
  • Any specific questions you may have for us.
    • Any two brands can be compared within sub-classes.

15 of 15

Conclusion

  • Magazines have continued to thrive as other forms of print media dwindle in readership.
  • Car and Driver has successfully made the transition into the digital age.
  • 87.8% of audience is male.
    • 2015 comScore//GfK MRI Media + MMx Fusion (08-15/S15)
    • Stats available on company website.