dspuk
Dave
Super Poster
Lifetime VIP Member
I want to clarify my earlier point — I wasn't disputing that emissions are a factor, rather that I wouldn't characterise the reasoning as 'eco nonsense.' My understanding is that the primary reason for the 80% charge limit is battery longevity, and the environmental benefits — reduced recycling, lower maintenance, and so on — flow naturally from that as secondary advantages.The 80% SOC is absolutely driven by emissions, the various formal emissions drive cycles (WLTP for most markets) that the emissions are measured over benefit significantly from the target only being 80%, it reduces the amount of time the alternator is operating during the cycle also in the most efficient battery absorption zone. The 80% allows enough head room to allow regenerative charging when you lift off. Both of these reduce measured CO2 and overall fuel consumption.
If there's a document that suggests otherwise, I'd genuinely welcome you pointing me to it. From what I can find, a quick search returns five commonly cited reasons for the 80% limit, none of which are primarily eco-driven. In my view, the environmental upside is a welcome benefit of good battery management, rather than the driving rationale behind it.
Note - I used Claude to make this answer much politer.













