Sometimes a retrofit is better than a new electric car

A recent study shows the benefits of retrofitting when it is used well. But the economic framework will still have to be strong enough for it to become a little more accessible, because the conversion remains far too expensive.

For the moment, it is very difficult to see the economic interest of retrofitting. This is due to the sometimes exorbitant prices for converting a thermal vehicle which, in some cases, is no longer worth much. It is therefore very difficult to see for the moment a future other than isolated transformations.. However, the practice would have its environmental advantages. This is what emerges from a study by the Carbone 4 firm, specialized in supporting and studying the improvement of carbon footprints. At the origins of the company, we find in particular Jean-Marc Jancovici, recognized for his expertise on everything related to energy. However, it is quite surprising and rare to see a purely automotive organization like Mobilians relay the study of the former polytechnician Jancovici! However, both parties converge towards an interest in retrofitting both for the economic and industrial sovereignty of a country like France and for the environment.

A retrofit is better than an electric one

To carry out its study, Carbone 4 relied on three scenarios, after 5 years of the vehicle being on the road:

• Scenario A: extension of the operation of the same diesel vehicle for 10 years.
• Scenario B: sale of the thermal vehicle followed by the purchase of a new electric vehicle and operation of the latter for 15 years.
• Scenario C: electrical retrofit and operation for 10 years.

The study also assumes that the retrofit is done with the installation of a battery “lower capacity than new electric vehicles”. But unfortunately it does not quantify all this exactly, even if a thermal converted to electric will indeed have less structural space than an electric designed to accommodate a battery from the design stage. Unsurprisingly, the worst case remains to keep your diesel for the 10 + 5 years of first entry into service.

In conclusion, if the gain of the retrofit compared to a diesel is substantial (81% less carbon footprint in scenario C vs A), it is also present when faced with the purchase of a new electric: “Electric retrofitting allows for a greater reduction in greenhouse gas emissions than purchasing a new electric vehicle. This advantage is mainly due to the economy of manufacturing the vehicle as well as the installation of a smaller battery. This gap becomes even more noticeable when the difference in battery size increases between the electric and retrofit versions, particularly for city cars.” Let us remember that the biggest CO2 emitter in the manufacture of an electric vehicle is not necessarily the battery, but rather the metallurgy. Keeping a vehicle therefore makes it possible to avoid waste in the manufacture of the necessary steel and aluminium.

Of course, the larger the vehicle, the greater the “carbon gain” between scenarios A and C. 81% on a Citroën C3 or equivalent, but 87% for a light utility vehicle and a whopping 90% for a bus. And it is precisely these two categories that retrofitting is currently aimed at, where it is more easily profitable: electric buses and LCVs being particularly expensive, the interest in converting a thermal model with retrofitting is quickly found, while light electric private vehicles are more accessible.