Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (13)
Similar to Epa fuel-economy
Similar to Epa fuel-economy (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Epa fuel-economy
- 1. EPA FUEL ECONOMY Geeta Nadagouda
- 2. Introduction • Environmental Protection Agency • How do Vehicle Types, Manufacturers, and Technical Specs drive fuel economy,CO2 and annual fuel costs? • Combined fuel economy (Combined MPG): weighted average of City and Highway MPG. • Estimated Annual Fuel Cost: based on annual mileage of 15,000 miles and projected gas prices.
- 3. Hypothesis • H₁ There is no significant difference in Annual Fuel Costs or Tailpipe CO2 emissions between Compact and Midsize cars. • H₂ There is no significant difference in Annual Fuel Costs or Tailpipe CO2 emissions between regular and premium gas. • H3 There is no significant difference in Annual Fuel Costs or Tailpipe CO2 emissions between Chevrolet and ford Cars.
- 4. Data • For Analysis , the data set was sample of 38,113 records from years 1984 to 2017 covering 133 unique car makes. • Data includes manufacturer information as well as vehicle types, technical specs and EPA ratings for Fuel Economy and CO2 emissions. • Descriptive Statistics confirm normal distribution for Combined MPG, Annual Fuel Cost, and Tailpipe CO2 emissions. • There is a positive correlation with Annual Consumption of Barrels/Tailpipe CO2 and Combined MPG/Annual Fuel Cost. • Annual fuel cost is based on 15,000 miles, 55% city driving, and the price of fuel used by the vehicle • The Data Comes from Kaggle https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/ws/
- 5. Method • Used Statistical Analysis in Excel to analyze hypotheses about fuel economy and annual fuel costs using data from the EPA. • Created an Excel Dashboard for summary Data. • Confirmed normal distribution using Descriptive Statistics. • Split data into sample populations using pivot table filters. • Used Analysis Tool Pak's Two-Sample t-Test Assuming Unequal Variances. • Visualizing independent-samples t-tests.
- 6. Descriptive Statistics Annual Fuel cost And Distribution Mean 1970.67536 Standard Error 2.727897763 Median 1950 Mode 2350 Standard Deviation 532.5552338 Sample Variance 283615.077 Minimum 500 Maximum 6050
- 7. Descriptive Statistics Tailpipe CO2 G/M And Distribution Mean 472.7613824 Standard Error 0.62594462 Median 467.7368421 Mode 493.7222222 Standard Deviation 122.2003581 Sample Variance 14932.92751 Minimum 0 Maximum 1269.571429
- 8. Descriptive Statistics Combined MPG And Distribution Mean 20.21606801 Standard Error 0.034691443 Median 19 Mode 18 Standard Deviation 6.772654709 Sample Variance 45.8688518 Minimum 7 Maximum 136
- 9. t-Test: Two-Sample Assuming Unequal Variances Null Hypothesis : Ho: μ1 - μ2 = 0 Alternative hypothesis : Ha: μ1 - μ2 ≠ 0
- 10. RESULTS
- 11. COMPACT VS MIDSIZE • There is significant mean difference between Compact and Midsize vehicles. • With p < 0.05, 95% confidence level, a Midsize vehicle costs between $-189 and $- 150 more annually than a compact cars. 1550 1600 1650 1700 1750 1800 1850 1900 Compact Midsize Compact vs Midsize Annual fuel Cost
- 12. COMPACT VS MIDSIZE • There is significant difference between Compact and Midsize vehicles. • With p < 0.05, 95% confidence level, a Midsize vehicles emit between -41.2g/m and -33.6g/p more Tailpipe CO2 than compact cars. 370 380 390 400 410 420 430 440 450 Compact Midsize Compact vs Midsize CO2 Grams/Mile
- 13. REGULAR VS PREMIUM • There is significant difference between Regular and Premium gas. • With p < 0.05, 95% confidence level ,Vehicles using Premium gas emit between 13.2g/m and 8g/m more CO2 than Vehicles using regular gas. 460 465 470 475 480 485 Regular Premium Regular Vs premium CO2 Grams/Mile
- 14. REGULAR VS PREMIUM • There is significant mean difference between Regular and Premium gas. • With p < 0.05, 95% confidence level, Vehicles using Premium gas emit between $-446.6 and $-423.15 more CO2 than Vehicles using regular gas 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 Regular Premium Regular Vs Premium Annual fuel cost
- 15. Chevrolet vs Ford Annual Fuel Cost And CO2 GM/Mile • Fail to reject the null between Chevrolet and Fuel cost. • With p > 0.05, at the 95% confidence level we fail to reject the null hypothesis of no significant difference between population means. 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 Chevrolet Ford Chevrolet vs Ford Annual Fuel Cost 500 502 504 506 508 510 512 514 516 518 Chevrolet Ford Chevrolet vs Ford CO2 GM/Mile
- 16. POTENTIAL IMPACT
- 17. RECOMMENDATIONS Drive Compact Vehicles to save money on Annual Fuel Cost 1 Drive Compact Vehicles to reduce Tailpipe CO2 2 Drive Vehicles that do not require premium gas to reduce Tailpipe CO2 3
- 18. Questions?
Editor's Notes
- Compact Observations: 5,508 Midsize Observations: 4,395 Reject the null Hypo that there is no difference between the two populations. With p < .05, there is significant difference between the two populations. The 95% confidence interval is between -189 and -150.
- Compact Observations: 5,508 Midsize Observations: 4,395 P= Reject the null that there is no difference between the two populations. With p < .05, there is significant difference between the two populations. The 95% confidence interval is between -41.2 and -33.6.
- Regular Gas Observations: 25,258 Premium Gas Observations: 10,133 P-Value - 6.39488E-80 Reject the null that there is no difference between the two populations. With p < .05, there is significant difference between the two populations. The 95% confidence interval is between -41.2 and -33.6.
- Regular Gas Observations: 25,258 Premium Gas Observations: 10,133 P-Value - 0 Reject the null that there is no difference between the 2 populations. With p- value < .05 there is a significant difference between the 2 popuations. The 95% confidence interval for the population difference is between -446.6 and -423.15
- Regular Gas Observations: 3810 Premium Gas Observations: 3155 P-Value - 0.878776392 co2 0.88 fuel Fail to reject the null. There is not enough evidence at p > .05. The 95% confidence interval for the 2 populations is between -6.44 and 5.52. -21.5 and 25