2013 Audi A3

2011 Chevy Volt Auction Hits $225K; Ferrari Would Be Cheaper, Greener

 
4 1,403 views Dec 14, 2010
Follow Nelson

2011 Chevrolet Volt

2011 Chevrolet Volt

Enlarge Photo
Whoa, wait, what? A $225,000 2011 Chevrolet Volt? It's true: the first production example of the extended-range EV was up for auction to benefit charity, and it managed to go for the princely sum at the close of bidding today. While that's a nice gesture, we'd rather have a Ferrari.

That's a mighty leap, from a hybrid/electric/series/EV/whatevermajig to an Italian supercar, you say? You're right, it is. But that's how our minds work--and here's why: the Ferrari would be cheaper (or at least similarly priced) to buy and it would, in the long run, be greener for the environment.

Surely, now, I'm pulling your leg. Except I'm not. The average commuter in the U.S. drives something north of 15,000 miles per year. The Volt, designed as the ultimate green commuter, will easily reach that figure in most owners' homes. Ferraris, on the other hand, are fine specimens not to be measured in the thousands of miles, but savored, all too briefly, in the timeless expanses of asphalt where they thrive. The result? Ferrari owners drive less than 5,000 miles per year, with many under 3,000 miles.

2009 Ferrari California

2009 Ferrari California

Apples to oranges! Or is it? This particular Chevrolet Volt, while certainly capable of the hard-slogging commuter duty any other Volt would see, is clearly a luxury purchase by a person of wealth, much like a Ferrari would be. But will it be tucked in a garage or handed off to a lucky nephew or niece on their way to college? The Ferrari certainly wouldn't.

So lets get down to the numbers. At 15,000 miles per year at an EPA-rated 60 mpg combined average, the Volt will drink somewhere around 250 gallons of dinosaur juice per year, or some mixture of gasoline plus electricity. The Ferrari, assuming a new California, is rated at 15 mpg combined by the EPA. If driven 3,500 miles, it will consume just 233 gallons of gasoline. That's a savings of 17 gallons, or about over 41 kilograms (90 pounds) of carbon dioxide emissions.

In other words, if you want to do the environment a favor, spend your luxury dollars on pampered Ferraris, not mass-market "green" commuter cars.

This exercise in ludicrous reasoning and strained interpretations brought to you by Tuesday afternoons, caffeinated sodas, and jerky knees.



Tags:
Posted in:
 
Contribute
Send us a tip Comment Contact the editor
Follow Us

 

Have an opinion?Join the conversation!

  • Posting indicates you have read this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use
  • Notify me when there are more comments
Comments (4)

  1. By WizardsLore Posted: 12/14/2010 5:15pm PST

    hahaha that kind of perverse thinking is brilliant...the logic is perfectly suited to the desired outcome.
    as for the purchase of the Volt itself being the first off the rank, i can appreciate this. In Australia the first box of Cherries or Mangoes rugularly go for north of $20,000 (which all goes to charity). When no more than a month later you can pick up a box for $20.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  2. By Daniel Joseph Posted: 12/15/2010 7:15am PST

    I am having problems with the carbon foot print math. Drive the Volt for 15000 miles and use 250 gallons or drive a Ferrari 3500 miles and only use 233 gallons? What is the Ferrari owner driving the rest of the 11,500 miles that average driver's drive each year? Hopefully the writer was writing in jest.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  3. fb_1001015277 avatar John Briggs Posted: 12/15/2010 2:24pm PST

    This is complete and utter BS. But I guess the author already knows that. At least he didn't publish it under GreenCarReports.
    How long before Fox News picks up this POS reporting.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  4. fb_1001015277 avatar John Briggs Posted: 12/19/2010 1:46pm PST

    Frankly, we have a lot of problems associated with gasoline and its combustion in this country.
    Chevrolet has made the most serious attempt since the Prius at making a large step right direction.
    However, people like the author, who should really know better, cannot help writing a dubiously argued contrarian piece saying that the old solutions are still better. This is right up there with the widely discredited (though still damaging) "research" supposedly showing that a Hummer was greener than a Prius.
    Again, burning large amounts of gasoline in this country impacts us all negatively (pollution, foreign trade, etc) and authors should resist the temptation to grab a few more eyeballs with work such as this.
    Later
    John C. Briggs
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

 

Have an opinion?Join the conversation!

Connect with Facebook

Motor Authority. Now with your friends.

Discover stories your friends read.
Share stories more easily.
You control what you share.
Learn more

Research New Cars

Go!


More from High Gear Media

 
 
MotorAuthority
  • Follow Us
  • Twiiter
  • Facebook
 
 
© 2011 MotorAuthority. All Rights Reserved. MotorAuthority is published by High Gear Media. Stock photography by Homestar, LLC. Send us feedback.