Fiat 500e Infographic Compares Energy Use Of EV To Common Household Appliances


Have you ever wondered how the energy consumption of your electric vehicle compares to the yearly electricity needed to supply some common household appliances?

More specifically, have you ever wondered how far the Fiat 500e could travel on the amount of electricity consumed yearly by a specific appliance?

Probably not, but just in case you did, Fiat put together this nifty 500e infographic.  Enjoy!

Category: Fiat

Tags: ,

32 responses to "Fiat 500e Infographic Compares Energy Use Of EV To Common Household Appliances"
  1. Djoni says:

    This is a very convenient way to show how cheap and pratical it is to use an EV.
    From a compliance car company that doesn’t want you to buy their electric car is somehow very pleasant.
    Just hope they would make this car available everywhere, because they would sell a lot!

    1. Mark C says:

      I went by my nearest Fiat dealer right after the 500e was introduced in those far off compliance states so I could test fit me in a Fiat 500. I fit, then I told the salesman and his sales manager to please contact me when they got the electric version to sell.

      I don’t want the gas version {it may be a fine car, but it gets worse economy than my current ride} and I love a small car.

    2. Goaterguy says:

      Exactly my first thought when I read this. It looks like the economies of scale are tipping in Fiat’s favor. I hope they sell this AND the convertible model or the next generation everywhere in the US. My wife would trade her 500c for an electric one in a minute after seeing how much she enjoys driving my Volt.

  2. Josh says:

    That is a great piece of material, shocking that it comes from (“Please don buy my”) Fiat. The only flaw I see is that they missed Air Conditioning. It would have ranked at 15k+ miles.

  3. Robert says:

    Also missed the most used Appliance of today: The Computer at home. That uses quite a bit more power in a 24 Hour run time than many would believe!

    1. Aaron says:

      Modern computers not working at full load don’t really take that much power. Unless you have a full gaming system with SLI’d video cards, a beefy CPU, and many hard drives, AND you run it at full tilt 24-7, it only consumes about the same as a single incandescent light bulb, or less.

      Many of us use laptops and iPads now. They are REALLY power efficient.

  4. Cavaron says:

    I did the math for the televison. My 40″ LED needs 45 Wh in eco mode and 80 Wh in its full, shiny brightness. Lets take 100 Wh for easy calculating, which would result in 1 kWh per 10 hours of watching TV. 1570 miles at 29 kWh per 100 miles would equal to 4550 hours or almost 190 full days of watching television a year. Who does that?

    1. Aaron says:

      Honey Boo Boo’s mother.

    2. Lindsay Patten says:

      It looks like they took their data from table 2.6.1 Operating Characteristics of Electric Appliances in the Residential Sector on page 2-8 of the cited buildings data book. That gives 234W for a >40″ Digital TV used 5 hours/day.
      2011 buildings energy data book
      to see their data.

    3. Francis L says:

      The numbers seems pretty inflated. The water heater, for instance, should consume 13 kWh a day to get to 16 457 miles. I guess it is not impossible for a big familly who use a lot of water, but this is clearly not the average.

      The idea of this illustration is great, but they should use more realistic numbers.

  5. David Murray says:

    I don’t agree with some of these things. For example, since when does a drill use as much power in a year as a blow dryer? I mean, obviously it depends on the person but even if both were used every day, the blow dryer consumes WAY more power.

    Also the television is shown to consume as much as a space heater. Sorry, I don’t buy that either. Not for a modern TV.

    1. Brian says:

      Yeah, the TV/Space Heater data looks really wrong to me. But then I did some math.

      I use space heaters in my children’s bedrooms so I can turn the house temperature way down at night. Those things draw 1500W when they are on. They run on a thermostat, with a duty cycle of maybe 10% for 10 hours/day for 5 months/year. That’s roughly 225kWh in a year. Given Fiat’s 29 kWh / 100 miles, their data says a space heater takes 314kWh in a year, or more than I use in cold upstate NY.

      As for the TV, I know several people who have large TVs that are on for many hours per day. Many people leave their TVs on for nearly 12 hours straight on Sunday. Sunday Football because the expected background noise in the house. I cannot use my own data because I have a “tiny” (large for me!) 28″ LED TV that uses <50W for an average of maybe 5 hours/week.

  6. Warren says:

    Yeah. Probably a bit overstated. But the energy to drive is only half the story…literally. About half the lifetime energy/CO2 is in the manufacturing of the EV.

    This is just one of several studies, some more biased than others. But they all agree within 20-25%. Electrifying conventional cars will not save us.

    This just points out what should be obvious. We need smaller, more aerodynamic cars, and lower speed limits, if we are to have any hope of not blowing right through dangerous CO2 levels within a few decades.

    1. Brian says:

      You are correct that simply switching from gasoline to electricity will not “save us” given the CO2 targets that scientists have set.

      However, they are a huge step in the right direction, and we need all the help we can get. Just imagine if we made smaller, more aerodynamic cars, lowered the speed limit, AND made them all-electric.

      Of course, the elephant in the room here is the fact that our homes are huge consumers of energy. We ALSO need to evaluate how many of these modern conveniences we really need and how we can make them more efficient.

      1. Warren says:

        Yes. And the housing bubble made it all much worse. The McMansion monstrosities that were built on our road during that scam are huge energy wasters…except for the vacant ones.

        Chalk it up to willful ignorance. I and many others saw this coming decades ago.

        1. Brian says:

          Agreed. I bought during the boom years (2007), and that’s one of the many reasons I bought an older house instead of building. The builders weren’t making houses that I wanted. Too many people just saw the square foot numbers or the number of bed/bath rooms and thought they were getting a great deal. Too bad the build quality isn’t there, and now many of them cannot afford to heat their houses.

          But I digress. And many of those houses are being tightened up. Several local contractors offer free home energy assessments. Often times people can get an economic payback of less than 5 years when investing in energy efficiency.

    2. Thomas J. Thias says:

      Warren, I have read the Climate Central study many times since its release in 2013.

      While well researched it omits a fuel source for Electric Fueled Vehicles that bordeers on the massive. A Fuel source that is abundant, widespread and FREE!

      Taking into account this fuel source for EFV the resuts of this published study would be dramatically different!

      Commeting on the linked study from Climate Central is James and leads into my premise-

      “[…]By James (Boulder, CO)
      on August 12th, 2013

      This study does not seem to take into consideration the time of day when electric vehicles are charged. If the EV owners have incentive to charge their vehicle during off-peak hours, this has a tremendous impact on the resulting emissions. Especially in states where coal is the bulk of power, charging vehicles at night will likely not result in higher emissions.[…]”

      Mr. James, in his comments rebuttal touches gently on off peak, overgeneration but does not reference US Senator Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn) Address on the US Senate Floor in 2012.

      The Senator states that the amount of waste electricity. off peak, at night
      (OverGeneration) equals he output of 65 – 70 nuclear power plants.

      “[…]”A conservative estimate is that we have an amount of electricity unused at night that’s equal to the output of 65 to 70 nuclear power plants between 6 p.m. and 6 a.m.,” Senator Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn) stated before the Senate Energy and National Resources Committee.

      “I suspect that’s probably our greatest unused resource in the United States. If we were to use that to plug in cars and trucks at night, we could electrify 43 percent of our cars and trucks without building one new power plant.”[…]”


      “[…]“Finally, if you believe that the solution to four-dollar gasoline and high energy prices is finding more American energy and using less, this is the best way to use less. Electrifying half of our cars and trucks could reduce our use of foreign oil by one-third, saving money on how we fuel our transportation system and cutting into the billions of dollars we send overseas for foreign oil.”[…]

      Link Goes To Torque News-


      “[…]U.S. power companies generate surplus electricity at night equivalent to the daytime output of 65 to 70 nuclear power plants, Alexander said, and that electricity could be charging batteries in electric cars.
      “I suspect that’s probably our greatest unused resource in the United States.”[…]”

      Link Goes To Forbes-

      Warren, no matter how much you promote the now 8track tape technology of the Legacy Transportation Industry, the new tech of Electric Fueled Vehicle’s or as they are called in China, New Energy Vehicles when refueling/charging, off peak uses a massive FREE, CARBON FREE fuel source that has historically been wasted!

      (Since it is already there, always been there and will be in vast amounts, going forward, it is literally FREE and CARBON FREE if now used in massive amounts to fuel the surging fleet of the Global Electric Fueled Vehicle Industry!)

      Should Carbon Central deem it appropriate to review their flawed study as linked in Warrens’ post, now incorporating the 40% of US Vehicles, if electrified, charging/refueling off peak at night, taking into to consideration that most EFV owners will refuel/charge their vehicle while it sit for hours while sleeping, I suspect the conclutions would be dramatically different!


      Thomas J. Thias


      1. Warren says:

        “no matter how much you promote the now 8 track tape technology of the Legacy Transportation Industry,”

        I am not sure how you conclude I support ICE from anything I have said. Electric drive has always been superior to ICE, even before we had lithium batteries. We once had buses, and light rail run off mains power, and if we are to have any chance of slowing CO2, we will again.

        My point was that large, fast cars are a luxury the world can not afford regardless of the power source.

        1. Warren says:

          As for the coal plants, they must all be closed, and replaced with faster reacting gas plants ASAP.

  7. mrenergyczar says:

    By switching to an energystar heat pump hot water heater I got an extra 6000 electric miles in my Volt each year… they make a heat pump dryer now (LG), savings not as large…

    1. Bryan Whitton says:

      I have a heat pump hybrid water heater as well. Runs on electricity year round and consumes lees money to run annually than my old nat gas WH. I have solar and a Honda FIT EV as a main drive. We still have my wife’s Acura CL which we use once a month to vist our daughter and her family. Other than that it sits in the garage. Almost zero energy bills. Changed jobs recently so my salary is back up to where it should be. Next year we will be upgrading the furnace to hybrid heat pump. With some additional panels we will be real close to $0 per year for energy.

      My last step will have to wait until the Model III comes out. Then we will be energy cost free and just in time to retire.

    2. Francis L says:

      LG even makes a dryer that consume no electricity! It is call a clothesline! I love those technologies of the future 🙂

      1. Warren says:

        Yes, especially for those of us who don’t live in the city, and are a big part of the transportation problem. The least we can do is use our clotheslines. It is tougher to do in the city. But in Tokyo you see drying racks sticking out of apartment windows everywhere, just like we did in the US when my parents were young.

      2. ModernMarvelFan says:

        I wonder how does the clothline works in Northern California in the last 3 weeks?

        So, I can’t wash my cloth for the last 3 weeks?

        1. Warren says:

          My mother hung clothes on a rack in the house all winter. It added humidity to the to dry air. Inconvenience beats apocolypse any day.

  8. DonC says:

    Super slick way of showing how home appliance use translates into electric car usage. Kudos to whomever came up with the graphic.

  9. Red HHR. says:

    No hot tub? Poor Fiat owners do not have hot tubs.

    1. Brian says:

      I’m pretty sure you could drive around the world with the energy used by a hot tub. Possibly more than once.

  10. Stephen says:

    The home is still a huge energy hog. My Volt uses only 20% of my household electrical use. The water heater is probably my biggest hog, but as WA energy is mostly hydro and renewables, switching to gas may produce more CO2.

    1. Eletruk says:

      Hopefully your power is not Puget Sound Energy. They are 24% coal because they own a plant in Montana, and 25% natural gas so almost 50% is fossil fuels.

  11. io says:

    Nice idea, well done Fiat, but I’m afraid I could drive exactly 0 mile on what the water heater pictured here uses: it’s a gas model. Oops.

  12. DaveinOlyWA says:

    In my area the 2nd highest user of electricity is the cable box. Fridge is first and very few here have electric water heaters, pools or A/C.

    I don’t have cable but when I did, the box could have easily doubled as a foot warmer!