Anecdotally:
I wanted the cheapest possible new car for commuting around the Bay Area. After some research, I found the Spark EV for only $60/month after rebates. With insurance it's only$5/day. I assumed electric cars were defacto expensive until I actually researched it. No idea why more people don't pick up these cars.<p>(Probably because it only goes 80 miles)
I thought that they would have overlooked taxes. In fact, I can't see how this is anything other than stacking the deck:<p>"Each vehicle’s price is based on its official manufacturer’s suggested retail price (MSRP) without tax. In addition, we evaluate the impact of federal tax refunds on the lifecycle costs of PHEVs, BEVs, and FCVs. The federal refund scales with the capacity of the battery up to a maximum value of $7500.45 Finally, we inspect the added effect of a best-case state tax refund. Assessed for the case of California, this contributes $1500 for PHEVs, $2500 for BEVs, and $5000 for FCVs.46 Some other states have similar programs, but they were not analyzed in detail."<p>In California, sales and license taxes are about 18% of purchase price (half up front, half over the next 11 years). But they've chosen to take California for the rebate, but not include higher taxes on the purchase price (hybrids have higher purchase price but lower operating costs).<p>Similarly a caption on one of the charts. "(d) a BEV-friendly energy price scenario, using average inflation-adjusted prices from Washington State in 2012 ($3.88/gal for gasoline and $0.086/kWh for electricity) and combined federal and state (CA) tax refunds."<p>This analysis is cherry picking pieces of the equation from different scenarios, and so paints a more rosy picture of the cost of alternative energy than <i>any</i> single consumer could possibly have faced.<p>I don't doubt that electric cars will get there, but saying they are there now is a lie.
What's missing from the article is an analysis of the break-even point. How long do you have to own your hybrid before the high initial cost pays off? There's also the problem that there are not "climate-friendly" equivalents for many vehicles. The article mentions the Chevy Suburban; there's no electric option that big. Obviously big SUVs are going to be more expensive to operate than sedans, which makes me wonder if they are even comparing apples to apples here.
<i>sigh</i> Another one of these that focus on new cars. Most fiscally minded people, like myself, exclusively drive used cars. Even a lightly used model that is only a couple of years old is significantly cheaper than a new car.<p>As I get more environmentally conscientious, here's what I really want to know: What is better for the environment manufacturing a branch new EV and driving it around for 5 years or picking up an existing junker that's going to be scrapped and doing the same.
Is there much research on how information like this actually affects consumer decisions? It looks good on paper, but the up-front cost is still generally much higher than higher-emission vehicles. My impression is that people will generally ignore these long-term benefits in favor of the more immediate reward of a lower investment at the start, but perhaps that coupled with the environmental factors could sway more minds than usual in this case?
I had more questions about the specific parameters they were using, so I followed the link (<a href="http://carboncounter.com/" rel="nofollow">http://carboncounter.com/</a>) in the article and checked out the "Customize" tab. Pretty sweet.
I think if climate friendly options were available in more chassis options and body styles, people would adopt them faster. I think people want to do the 'right' thing in switching to an EV/hybrid option, but there isn't a climate friendly, cost effective pickup/SUV option available.<p>Tesla has the right idea in offering a low cost EV option that doesn't look stupid with the Model 3. If there were Camry/Corolla and Accord/Civic EV options with the same off-the-lot price tag and same exact body style available, I think we would see more widespread adoption.<p>Additionally, if we were to see more electric utility vehicle options available with body styles identical to the gasoline powered ones we see on the road today, I believe that would capture another large swath of consumers. Of course, this hinges on the manufacturers to offer these options in spite of their gasoline producer friends urging them not to.
Can I ask a couple of naive questions (I'm not very well informed on these issues):<p>1. Since electric cars may well be powered by coal, not gasoline, might they not be more heavily emitting?<p>2. Does the environmental impact of creating and disposing all the batteries in electric cars counterbalance any emission gains?