Energy metric (Terrain Cost)

Why Distance Alone Is Not Enough for Route Planning

NOTE: You will need to go into the settings page and enable EV mode to account for the regenerative breaking, otherwise, the application will assume that you do not get any energy back from regenerative breaking

Most routing engines compare paths using distance or travel time. While this works well in flat terrain, it ignores one of the most important factors in real-world travel: elevation.

Two routes that start and end at the same altitude may require very different amounts of energy. The reason is simple: downhill sections often lead to future uphill sections. When a route repeatedly drops and climbs again, the vehicle must recover the lost altitude. Regenerative braking can recover some energy during descents, but it rarely offsets the full cost of the climb that follows.

Because of this, routes with frequent elevation oscillations can require significantly more energy than routes that climb more steadily.

Terrain Cost: Elevation-Aware Route Analysis

Terrain Cost introduces elevation-aware routing analysis, allowing routes to be compared using estimated energy cost in addition to traditional metrics like distance or travel time.

Instead of modifying the routing algorithm itself, the system analyzes the elevation profile of each candidate route and computes a terrain-based energy estimate. This allows users to compare routes using two independent metrics:

• traditional routing metrics (distance or time)
• estimated terrain energy cost

Terrain Cost provides elevation-aware routing analysis, allowing developers to compare routes by distance, elevation profile, and estimated energy consumption.

Example: Two Routes With Different Energy Costs

Consider two routes that start and end at the same elevation. Both appear similar on a map, but their elevation profiles differ significantly.

Route A repeatedly descends and climbs again, forcing the vehicle to regain lost altitude multiple times. Route B climbs more gradually with fewer elevation reversals.

Although Route A is slightly shorter, its cumulative climbing requires significantly more energy. Terrain Cost exposes this difference by analyzing the full elevation profile of each route.

How Terrain Cost Works

Terrain Cost operates as a lightweight analysis layer on top of standard routing output.

• Elevation data is sampled along each route segment
• The elevation profile is analyzed to compute cumulative climbing and descent
• An energy model estimates the cost of climbing and the partial recovery possible during descents
• Segments that produce net energy recovery may produce negative energy values

Because the system operates entirely on local elevation data, Terrain Cost works in offline environments and does not require external APIs or internet connectivity.

Who Benefits From Terrain-Aware Routing

• Electric vehicle navigation systems
• Cycling route planners
• Delivery and logistics optimization
• Autonomous robotics navigation
• Energy-aware routing research

Compare Routes by Energy, Not Just Distance

Terrain Cost allows developers and users to analyze routes using elevation-aware metrics. By exposing the true energy impact of terrain, routes can be compared using distance, elevation profile, and estimated energy consumption.