What's holding back electric car sales?

Range and $$$$$. If Toyota offered a car that got a 200 mile range for the price of a prius I may have bought it.

 

'Ever priced a tranny' or the like seems to be the common retort for electric fans. I'll bet few 4 cyl hondas ans Toyotas need transmissions after 15+ years if not beat to heck or never maintained.

We just sold a 22 year old lowly 1992 Mazda 626 with 130k total miles and original transmission. Seemed to need a lot of brake, A/C and two water pump / timing belt replacements (probably just lousy parts on first repair).

One thing, BEV's wouldn't seem so good for anyone who doesn't drive all that much. Even in CA with Prius, you're making out the best if you drive 15k miles a year. That's quite a bit of miles for one driver.

 

We bought a 2005 Honda Accord sedan, one owner with 116k mi for $10k otd and put over $1k to bring the maintenance completely up to snuff. I'd wager this car is not going to have high repair costs anytime soon.

My niece and then boyfriend bought a 2002 Civic in about 2009 at 100k miles. Somehow they paid near $10k otd. That car has received very few repairs. She doesn't have much money. It leaks some oil, but at 180k miles, it still runs.

 

I think there's more to it.

The second hand market is important and I guess it varies from country to country. Here in the UK depreciation of a car is very important as many people only keep a car for 2 or 3 years. You don't want to buy a car that is going to be impossible to sell on, or you lose lots of money on, in 3 years time. The second hand market could be a bit more cautious as by it's very nature is aimed at people with less money. I think without long warranties people won't take the risk and that could limit the number of people buying new. Would you want to pay good money for a 5 year old Nissan Leaf with 70,000 miles that has lived in Arizona all its life? Nope, me neither. Or if you had a choice of a 100,000 mile Leaf and a 100,000 mile diesel Ford Focus? People will err on the car that will be a known quantity and cheap to fix.

To sell more new BEVs should manufacturers encourage more options for their second hand market? Fixed price HV battery replacement perhaps? Or longer warranties or both? Toyota in the UK are very open about the replacement cost of their hybrid battery; £800 ($1,300). They also offer a warranty of 10 years inclusive with unlimited miles if you service your hybrid with their dealers. That adds peace of mind.

Hybrid Cars FAQ | Frequently Asked Questions | Toyota UK
Toyota Warranty | Toyota UK

Is this where Renault have gone wrong here in the UK? You have to get it right like Toyota seem to have. Renault offer a lease on their HV battery which sounds good in theory. Their lowest priced HV battery lease is £77 per month ($123) or £924/$1476 a year with a maximum mileage of 6,000 a year. That's commercial suicide. I can understand a company paying this for a company car on a lease but after 3 years when the car is sold on who is going to pay that sort of money on a 5 or 7 year old second hand car? The battery lease is for the life of the car! Here you can buy a rather nice 10 year old Ford for about £1,500. Why would you pay that amount every year just to have the battery AND pay for electric to charge the car? Madness or typically stubborn French? lol

So I think there should be more focus on the second or third owners and some backup for them as without these owners the person who bought the car new will not be able to sell their car on.

 

I think Grupy Cabbie hit the nail on the head here.

 

GuppyCabbie has a good point, and a new user name.
But getting to the question posed by OP, "...what can Auto manufacture CEOs do to stimulate EV auto sales?" one answer is to improve the battery warranty. I would like to see 10-yr/150k miles in all states not just CARB. Hyundai's lifetime hybrid batt warranty is appreciated.

Of course, this presumes Auto CEO's actually want to encourage EV sales. If we buy the Toyota argument, it's a money loser. I do feel there are some "uneducated" consumers who might benefit from EV (eg; for a third car when the kids start driving etc) but at this juncture is probably better to "sell" EV to educated, supportive consumers.

Wow that must be the last 626...ours died at about 100k and we donated to charity years ago.

 

In my mind, people want what they have now. For alternative fuel vehicles to work for the "masses", your going to have to give them the same...without the sacrifices and limitations...otherwise why would/should we do it. Until then, these vehicles will only hold a small share of the consumer market based on the buyers financial standing, use within the restrictions and political/philosophic beliefs. Additionally, as was pointed out earlier, the whole petroleum/car/support industry has to change at the same time, otherwise what's going to happen to the jobs and big oil company profits. Change is coming, but I think they are going to meter it to us at a controlled rate. Then again...what do I know.

 

Everything you say here makes sense. Every single time I drive I see the range of everyone else's vehicle choices. It is clear that vehicle selections will be economically driven, but over an extreme range of preferences. Fortunately, for a small percentage the EV makes sense. Also fortunately, improvements over time will make the percentage grow slowly but surely.

 

GrumpyCabbie, my apologies. :-(

 

The last 2 technologies that took off in the US, both really went through their initial adopter phase decades before, but grew rapidly through cafe regulation.

modern fwd really started with the mini which came out in about 1960 IIRC. It had big advantages for fuel economy, but fuel in the US was inexpensive until the oil embargo. CAFE requirements quickly pushed most compact to midized cars to fwd starting around 1980. The honda civic and accord had already proved fwd fuel efficiency with good drivability in the early and mid 1970s.

The first SUVs were really government funded jeeps in wwII. In 1990 when the explorer came out cafe loophole aready favored it over large cars and station wagons. The government funded hummer, along with low gas prices in the 1990s pushed SUVs and crossovers that could be labeled as trucks for CAFE purposes, sent SUV market share soaring (market share peaked in 2004). Cafe will finally be fixed in 2025 and SUVs with market share will continue to shrink but these vehicles will be on the road for a long time

We need at least a decade to go through an adopter phase as car companies perfect the plug-in, and for battery prices to drop. After that government policy could easily push rapid growth of plug-ins. Until then they just won't have proven themselves on the road long enough for the mass market to accept.

Japanese tax policy is the reason hybrids there have such a big market share. In the US gas and pollution taxes are just too low. I only see slow growth here unless tax policies change. In europe tax policies favor diesels and hybrids even have a smaller market share there than the US.
+1

Big oil can take care of itself, and productivity is high, so not many jobs will be lost. Service stations though may close, the biggest impact of plug-ins may be reduced income for dealership maintenance and repair employment and profits. That is why you see big auto fighting so hard.

 

lol what for? I actually think it's quite funny.

I was a cab driver for 10 years. I've heard it ALL before, and then some.

 

Simple answer: the ban on crude oil exports.

• USA oil prices are going down due to shale drilling.
• Even the seasonal gas price drop has been breath taking.
• Keystone to import tar sands oil no longer needed.
• USA fleet efficency improvements.

I remember when gas was less than $2/gal reading articles that a hybrid required $3/gal to be affordable. Well it looks like we've well on the way and the crude oil export ban helps.
Bob Wilson

 

I don't think that lhe first 3 items on the list have much to do with electric vehicle (PHEV and BEV) penetration. Let me address that one first. US fleet efficiency can be improved by

A) Cafe standards (we have good new standards that will start pushing hybrids and electrified cars in the 2020s)
B) Higher fuel prices to the consumer (this can be done with fuel taxes, but prices are stable not rising)
C) Replacing old inefficient vehicles with newer more efficient vehicles.

So us government has A) finally going in the right direction, but fleet improvements are very slow because of B and C. Japanese tax structure addresses B and C but at a high price to consumers. C is one of the biggest fleet problems in the US. As regulations have gotten tougher all the time the vehicle fleet is aging. Some states charge fees based on the value of vehicles which encourages keeping of old guzzlers. California has both this, and its opposite, goodies (tax credits + HOV) to create an unbalanced fleet of new hybrids and plug-ins allong with a big fleet of old polluters.

On the first 3 points. The us currently does have a ban on exporting oil, refiners can export refined products. The US has a big net import of oil and refined products when all are counted. Yes shale drilling booms are increasing supply, but we also have poor economies in Europe and Japan that have demand low, and ISIL hasn't yet blown up the oil fields, they actually were selling oil to support their terrorism. We should assume stable prices in the short term, but recovery in europe and china in 5 years could push demand much higher, pushing prices up. Or we could have anouther war in the mideast that pushes prices up.

Seasonal gas prices are really a regulatory phenomena. Better regulations might stop the big burst up in the summer of fuel prices, but these summer spikes often lower vmt during those summer driving seasons. A worse tail waggnig the dog is oil futures. The US could again restrict oil future trading to those companies engaged in producing or consuming large quantities of oil, this would need to be coordinated with other markets.

Last Keystone currently is being implemented with trucks and trains, and accident rates and spills are soaring. Further delay will only increase oil spills of this resource. If you read the reports keystone does not increase ghg versus truks and trains, and I can't see the US congress closing the boarder to Canadian oil, while importing oil from enemy countries. I think its time for the environmentalist to admit that no keystone does nothing for the environment without a ban of Canadian oil.

 

...as far as crude oil exports, I read that Delta Airlines (now running a refinery in Philly) has an issue with the exports.

Apparently U.S. law requires that Delta and any U.S. refinery pay extra fees to ship crude (Congress mandates US flagged ships at much higher $$$). So if crude oil exports are allowed, it will be cheaper to ship crude overseas than to the East Coast for example.

 

Oopse I didn't realize obama had changed the law. Well I agree with you and bob we should not have changed the law to just allow oil exports.

The reason oil companies want to export oil, is the spread. Gulf coast refineries have spent a lot of money upgrading so they can produce gasoline and diesel from poor grades of oil. There is a spread in price between poor grades and better grades of oil. The finds in the baaken and eagleford are high grade light sweet crude. The refiners don't want to pay the big spread for it since they can handle the nasty stuff. If its captive then the spread to the higher grades of oil will be lower in the US. Big oil wants to make that extra profit. I don't see that as such a bad deal as long as the government gets a big cut, but if we just waive the rules, we will over produce the new finds and they will dry up quickly. It appears the government just sold out our oil.

We should change the flagging restrictions of boats to the east coast refineries as well.

 

There is a catch. Actually, there are many and that is the problem.

It is not just any plug. It has to be L1, meaning a dedicated 15 amps. It also has to be outdoor because extension cords are not allowed.

If it is indoor, it is most likely in a garage. How many garages are open to freely go in and charge (even for a fee)?

Even getting a place to charge, you need 12 hours to get about 40 miles.

Sugar coating opportunity charges can sour potential buyers once they give it some thoughts.

 

Ok I made a short statement that didn't include all the potential pitfalls. I didn't mean to sugar coat it, but yes its not as easy as just plugging in. You can charge a PHEV at most of the L1 and L2 public stations on plug-share (approximately 25,000 locations in the US, and growing fast), but you may have to pay and may have to join a network. You can charge at home as long as you have a suitable line or install one. If you have permission you can charge your phev at standard outlets that have capacity of 15 amps more than anything else on the circuit. Many phevs have lower power L2 (3.3kw) capability than bevs so they will charge slower. YMMV from the epa estimates. Because of this and the convenience of filling at the approximately 120,000 gas stations, most users will mainly charge at home and/or work and not at public or other charging stations.

Do you think your prius phv is less convenient to fuel than a prius liftback? I really don't think so. You can can fuel it everywhere the liftback can Plus at home, plus at a large number of plugs.

The volt has the highest customer satisfaction of any gm car. The tesla model S has the highest customer satifaction

 

You know, new technology is a funny thing...

First of all, there's about a 1-in-a-Million change the new idea works technically;

If it works technically, there about a 1-in-a-Million chance it'll be economical;

Even if it's a total technical and economic success, there's still big chance the new technology will not be used because there are other options, and people or gov'ts may simply prefer not to go that way. Or you may have something people want, but they fake it due to "not invented here syndrome" they are happier to not recognize the advance, or prefer not to pay the royalties even if price is fair.

So it's a hard knock life to have a technology success like Prius.
In the case of EV, I think there is relatively strong support of the concept.

 

+1

Nissan CEO: LEAF Is Now Profitable, 80% Of Its US Sales Come From 4 Cities
Note the leaf is only profitable on variable cost as the prius was around this point, it doesn't come close to paying off that massive R&D. That will take a vary sucessful gen II.

If we are just talking sales volume world wide the prius sold 81 thousand units in the first 49 months, while the leaf has sold 123 thousand units in the first 43 months (that is as much data has we have), the volt 77 thousand in that same time period. That means both the leaf and volt are ahead of the prius at this point, and the outlander phev, tesla model S, prius phv, and ford fusion energi are all doing better than the number two at the time hybrid - honda insight. These all benefit from bigger government incentives than the prius had outside of japan and higher fuel prices.

 

It doesn't hurt that the respective auto companies are putting their best engineering efforts into it. None of those cars are sold using supermodels in car advertising (except Kia?) since it's what's inside that will be the make or break the car's success.