advanced conventional midsized car, assuming no subsidies. A reduced (50-mile) range EV
can be offered for a price of only $3,000 more than an advanced conventional car. EVs with
a range of 200 miles however, are expected to be too heavy and unrealistically expensive in
2005.By 2015, incremental prices for an intermediate-size EV with a 100-mile range could
come down to the $3,000 range. A 200-mile range intermediate-size EV would still probably
be priced about $24,000 more than an equivalent conventional car, unless the lithium
polymer cell battery becomes a reality. If this were the case, it is possible that an EV with a
300-mile range could be priced about $12,000 more than an equivalent intermediate car.
Note, however, that these comparisons are to OTA’s advanced conventional cars, which have
costly body structures (especially the 2015 optimistic case, with a carbon fiber composite
body).
Public estimates of EV prices are often not well documented in terms of the assumptions
regarding battery size, vehicle size, vehicle range, and performance, which are all critical to the
value of price obtained. For example, a major study for the Northeast Alternative Vehicle
Consortium^32 used cost numbers with no specific estimate of motor size and rating, and used a
fixed battery capacity (21 kWh) regardless of vehicle weight. In addition, the methodology used
to convert cost to price does not follow standard costing guidelines; for example, a fixed amount
of the investment is amortized each year instead of being allocated to each EV produced, so that
as production rises, unit costs fall. Other studies, such as one by the California Air Resources
Board^33 ignores the difference between cost and price, which understates EV prices dramatically.
Many estimates of very low EV costs from environmental or conservation groups are,
indeed, referring to manufacturer costs rather than vehicle prices, or do not control for
range or performance. It is quite possible that, if these calculations were made more explicit in
terms of assumed EV size, range, and performance, and the methodology were corrected to
transform cost to price, then much of the difference in price estimates could be easily explained.
Emission EffectsThe key emissions advantage of EVs is that they have virtually no vehicular emissions^34
regardless of vehicle condition or age--they will never create the problems of older or
malfunctioning “superemitters,”which are now a significant concern of the current fleet. Because
EVs are recharged with power-plant-generated electricity, however, EV emissions performance
should be viewed from the standpoint of the entire fuel cycle, not just the vehicle. From this
standpoint, EVs have a strong advantage over conventional vehicles in emissions of hydrocarbons
(HC) and carbon monoxide (CO), because power generation produces little of these pollutants.
Where power generation is largely coal-based--as it is in most areas of the country--some net
increases in sulfur dioxide might occur. However, Clean Air Act rules “cap” national powerplant(^32) International Environment and Resource Program, “Near Term EV Costs,” prepared for Northeast Alternative Vehicle Consortium October
- 33
34 Air Resources Board, "Technical Support Document: Zero Emission Vehicle Update,” April 1994.
EVs with unsealed batteries will sometimes generate emission from deteriorating anodes and cathodes and vaporizing electrolyte.