An electric motor cab and driver, London, c1897-c1900. T They suffered from various faults and were … [+]
Getty Images
Much of the media coverage on electric vehicles consists of either glowing reports of planned models and booming sales (in select markets) or on the other end, descriptions of expensive battery recalls or autopilot failures. Few if any of these reports are analytical in nature, and do not shed much light on the prospects for electric vehicles in the next few years.
I often feel like the guy in the old commercial who, listening to a sales pitch about a new microwave, keeps mumbling, “But does it brown the food?” There are any number of people who rave about electric vehicles’ attributes—you don’t have to stop at gas stations; you just press a button and it goes; you can recharge while you get lunch—but they leave me mumbling “But will everyone want to buy one?”
Consumer acceptance is a funny thing and difficult to predict. (Organic dog food? Really?) There are always early adopters and people who like the exotic, but when it comes to mass markets, some things tend to be true, or at least most of the time. My mother loved the Checker brand automobiles but they were pretty rare on the road except for Yellow Cabs. (Ken Burns documentary series on the national parks has one at Yellowstone that might actually be us on our 1965 vacation.) In order to dominate the transportation sector as projected in most ‘Green’ scenarios, EV sales need to grow dramatically.
I’ve recently analyzed the prospects for electric vehicles and while the newest models are very impressive, I am skeptical about their ability to move beyond being a niche market—albeit a pretty good sized and growing niche. Recent research is worth noting as it provides some insight into the prospects for EVs to achieve the ambitious targets some are setting.
Aside from predicting consumer preferences, the still-evolving technology means that data from the past decade is of limited usefulness. But of course, forecasters and pundits can’t throw up their hands and say, “We don’t know,” kind of like Yoda saying, “Always in motion is the future.” (One of the most profound comments in Star Wars, which says something for the scripts.) Fortunately, there is some recent research that is interesting and informative, albeit not definitive.
A recent NBER paper[i] estimated the miles driven by EV owners using utility bills in California; by looking at the increased power consumption and using mileage per kilowatt hour estimates they concluded that most EVs were used for commuting, not for longer trips. Roughly 6000 miles per year was what the average EV travelled, which is less than half for the average vehicle overall (15,000 miles). The implication is that EV owners treat them as second cars, not their primary vehicles. It also means that the cost per mile is much higher for EVs than most estimates, because most of the costs are for the vehicles, not the fuel, and applying it over 40% as many the miles as a conventional vehicle more than doubles the cost per mile.
Scott Hardman and Gil Tal published research in Nature Energy[ii] that showed about 20% of Californians who owned electric vehicles switched back to ICE vehicles. Interestingly, the limited range of EVs didn’t seem to be the biggest driver of the switch, but rather lack of access to charging (something the government can address). Also, quite a number of those who switched to ICEs seemed ready to return to EVs, apparently when charging infrastructure improved and perhaps with newer, more advanced EV models.
This was followed by a KAPSARC study[iii] written by Rubal Dua and Prateek Bansal which used survey research covering the U.S. more broadly, finding that about half of EV buyers switched back to ICEs. The higher percentage, they theorize, is due to Californians’ greater environmental concerns. The figure below shows the reasons given for switching from EVs back to oil-fueled cars, and they are similar to what Hardman and Tal found, although range was more important than charging availability. Again, this makes sense as many urban drivers in California have lengthy commutes, but much spent in heavy traffic where EVs don’t draw on power. People in much of the country have longer commutes and thus might find the limited range more important.
Reasons EV buyers switched back to ICE vehicles
KAPSARC Dua and Bansal, see footnote iii.
This all provides some grounds for optimism: EVs might gain popularity as second or commuter cars for families and government spending is planned to increase the access to charging stations significantly. On the other hand, given the relatively immature market for EVs (very few are more than three or four years old), the high cost of battery replacement has not yet affected many drivers, and the resale value of the most recent models is an unknown.
Again, like all such research, while it may be very informative it is hardly definitive, particularly about the long-term prospects for electric vehicles with continually evolving technology and government support. However, it implies that the near-term prospects might not be so rosy, as consumer experiences prove more negative amongst the larger market than EVs have penetrated to date.
[i] Burlig, Fiona, James B. Bushnell, David S. Rapson, and Catherine Wolfram, “Low Energy: Estimating Electric Vehicle Electricity Use,” Working Paper 28451, February 2021.
[ii] “ Discontinuance Among California’s Electric Vehicle Buyers: Why are Some Consumers Abandoning Electric Vehicles?” UC Davis Research Reports April 2021.
[iii] Dua, Rubal, and Prateek Bansal, “Once Consumers Adopt an Electric Vehicle, Do They Go Back?” KAPSARC Instant Insight, June 16, 2021.