"You say an electric car will cost me? No problem."
How can we figure out how much potential electric car buyers are willing to pay for their battery-powered rides? Why not just ask them?
That's what Liberty Electric Cars did at the recent Eden Project 'Green' Car Show. Liberty conducted "in-depth interviews" at the show and found that green car fans are willing to pay up to 30 percent more for a car if it's powered solely by electrons. That's a huge premium that at least some in our little community are willing to fork over. On a $20,000, for example, that's six grand, and 65 percent of the people Liberty interviewed said the 30 percent extra is no problem. Forty-five percent, though, said that smaller, less powerful, "city" cars would not be acceptable. I guess that means that 55 percent think that the Th!nk City (pictured) would be OK, which is good.
Liberty Electric Cars is the company that's working to convert Range Rovers to EVs. More info after the jump.
[Source: Liberty Electric Cars]
PRESS RELEASE:
'GREEN' CAR BUYERS PREPARED TO PAY SIGNIFICANT PREMIUM FOR ELECTRIC CARS
Environmentally aware car buyers will pay a premium of up to 30 per cent for zero emission driving but are divided on accepting compromise on space, performance and utility.
These are the key findings from in depth interviews carried out by Liberty Electric Cars, among visitors to the Eden Project 'Green' Car Show.
Sixty-five per cent of respondents said that they would be prepared to pay up to 30 per cent more, for a zero emission electric car which addresses global warming by eliminating car exhaust. However 45 per cent said that they would not be willing to downsize to a small 'city' car with less performance, in order to go 'green'.
Barry Shrier, CEO of Liberty Electric Cars, which is developing the world's first zero emission electric Range Rover said: "The product development message is clear. As car buyers move to more environmentally-friendly technologies they want the best of both worlds; cars that deliver on performance, safety, functionality and style, without the high cost to the environment."
Fifty-five per cent expected an electric car to have a driving range greater than 100 miles. The Liberty Electric Range Rover will travel for over 200 miles, or further with its on board generator.
When asked what would be the 'clean' fuel of the future, electric power was most people's first choice.
EDITOR'S NOTES
* Electric vehicles have 80 per cent lower running costs than petrol cars. For example, if a driver spends £50 each week on fuel, the equivalent cost of using electrical power to make the same journeys would be £10. In addition the driver of an electric car will save on Congestion Charging, parking and road tax. In London, that could be a saving of up to £200 per week.
* Liberty Electric Cars Ltd is investing £30 million in the re engineering of large luxury cars and 4x4s into emission-free, high performance electric vehicles.
* Annual vehicle production, which will include the world's first zero emission, electrically powered Range Rover, will be in tens of thousands and will create around 250 new technology and manufacturing jobs.
* The Liberty Electric Range Rover will drive cleanly and quietly around roads and cities, free of tax, congestion and parking charges, making less environmental impact than even the smallest, most fuel efficient car, yet still offering the comfort and security of a luxury 4x4.
* Liberty electric cars will incorporate state of the art energy storage and management systems, which the company will also offer to other vehicle manufacturers, commercial fleet operators and emergency response organisations.
* The Liberty Range Rover will power its way through 200 miles before needing a charge, and some models will carry on board range extending generators. Costs will range between £95,000 and £125,000 depending on model and specification.
* Liberty Electric Cars' management team is led by Barry Shrier, founder and CEO. Barry Shrier is a technology entrepreneur. As managing director at Deutsche Bank, he developed the mobile payment system – Pay Box. He is also a non executive director of Washington-based satellite technology company Leo Terra LLC.
* Lord Anthony St John of Bletso LLM chairs the company's advisory committee, which includes former science minister Ian Taylor MBE, MP and a number of experts in electric vehicle system design.
* A number of UK manufacturing locations are under consideration, including south west England. Manufacturing will be managed in a way that makes as little environmental impact as possible, with much of the assembly work taking place alongside key suppliers' existing operations.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Potsy 8:50AM (6/27/2008)
why are we so hot on electric cars? If I am not mistaken, don't we derive our electricity from buring coal? How is this going to help the emissions issue?
Reply
Phil L. 8:57AM (6/27/2008)
Simple: Unlike other vehicles, EV's overall emissions automatically improve as their fuel source changes.
Of course, EVs use electricity generated from anything. As we transition from coal to... well, whatever the future holds, EVs are already equipped to take advantage of that change.
Reply
Steve 9:18AM (6/27/2008)
I don't care what anybody says in a survey for a car that does't exist. Electric cars will succeed only when the day-to-day benefits to the purchaser outweigh their drawbacks.
Will I pay more for an electric car than an ICE car? Yes, if it has the same range and performance as a ICE car.
Will I pay more for an electric that has 1/6 the range of an ICE? Or 1/3 the power? No. But I'd consider paying the same price.
The more versatile the car, the more people will be willing to pay. To believe the majority of people would pay 30% more than a Mini or Civic for a limited power/range citycar is foolish. As said elsewhere, $6000 buys a lot of gas (36,000 miles, assuming $5/gal & 30mpg avg).
Reply
BlackbirdHighway 9:18AM (6/27/2008)
I don't understand. How is it that burning coal to make electricity doesn't produce any emissions when that electricity powers our houses, but when the electricity powers cars, suddenly you get emissions? How does the power plant know where the electricity is going to be used?
Maybe the coal power plant produces emissions all the time, regardless of where the electricity is used, but people who don't like electric cars don't want to talk about that, because that means the problem is the power plant, not the electric car.
We have lots of options for making electricity: coal, nuclear, hydro, wind, solar, natural gas, tides, etc.
There aren't any panels you can put on your roof that turn sunshine into gasoline.
Reply
GoodCheer 9:39AM (6/27/2008)
About half the electricity in the US is generated by burning coal. The other half is natural gas (~20%), nukes (~20%), and renewable (~10%).
The carbon footprint of driving an electric car is about the same as driving at 45-75 mpg, and as Phil L. points out this at least has the potential to increase with time. I dream of an EV and a PV array, so my carbon footprint goes to (almost) zero.
But carbon isn't the only thing I consider. For every barrel of petroleum I can displace with electricity, that's $140 fewer dollars in the national debt. If you think it's up to government to worry about that for you... well, don't hold your breath. If you think that it is in the interest of the nation you can opt, as I will, to pay more for an electric car so that I can have personal transportation powered by domestic fuel sources.
Reply
Chad 10:15AM (6/27/2008)
True, but it will help the cost of oil issue as well as the dependence on foreign oil issue.
Also, coal currently costs 5 cents per Kw and wind 8 cents per Kw and falling fast. As demand for electricity increases, the demand (i.e. cost) of coal will also increase. Therefore, very soon wind power will be cheaper than coal power.
In capitalism when something is cheaper we will switch to it in mass.
Reply
Throwback 10:21AM (6/27/2008)
I'm curious of the income for the folks who are willing to pay 30% more for a EV. I certainly would not pay 30% more for a car that has a limited range. For the average buyer 30% is a major hit, especially when you consider most new car buyers finance for 4-6 years.
Reply
Throwback 10:22AM (6/27/2008)
I'm curious of the income for the folks who are willing to pay 30% more for a EV. I certainly would not pay 30% more for a car that has a limited range. For the average buyer 30% is a major hit, especially when you consider most new car buyers finance for 4-6 years.
Reply
AlexNC 10:47AM (6/27/2008)
I am a huge fan of electric cars, but they have a LONG way to go before the mass market accepts them. Who are the people taking these polls? They seem very skewed to me. Ask anyone I know, and they will say their is no way in hell they will pay more for a car that gets 1/8th of the travel range and takes over night to re-fuel. The only way electric will become mass market is to increase the range to at least 200 miles, and make a quicker way to recharge them. Until then, people are going to continue to turn towards more fuel efficient cars that allow them to travel as far and as often as they want. There are too many downfalls with electric cars right now, and price is one of the biggest ones.
Reply
s10 10:55AM (6/27/2008)
Too many downfalls with electric cars? Range & charge?
We know that the current range covers most peoples driving habits already, so it is just a mental problem, not a real problem for most people.
If the current trend of price increases continues, and it will, the mentality will change much faster than you can immagine. The survival instinct is still a part of human behaviour.
Reply
Danielle Andre 10:58AM (6/27/2008)
@Chad: You make a great point. At the end of the day, we HAVE to make these emerging technologies cost-competitive, or they won't get picked up in a way that will make a difference. We can't rely on "early adopters" only to make some serious changes.
Reply
AlexNC 11:54AM (6/27/2008)
Ok, here is a scenario for you. I am single, I can only afford one car. I buy an electric car. I love to go hiking and I love to go to the beach, but those are both 200 miles away. My electric car only has a range of 40 miles. Gas cars cost $300 a week to rent. What the hell am I supposed to do?
The only solution is to own 2 cars. One electric, and one gas. The only problem with that is that it costs more than I can afford, and I would have to insure two cars when I only use the second a few times a year.
Reply
vfx 11:13AM (6/27/2008)
ALEXNC
The survey was done in the UK where operating costs are much higher (the notes say 80 percent) that in the US.
Reply
Whopper 11:34AM (6/27/2008)
In his book, Guts, Bob Lutz (the guy you all love to hate) made a valid point - focus groups and customer surveys are a waste of time. "The customer is not always right!" Ask a guy on the street if he'd pay 30% more for an EV and he says yes. Park his butt opposite a car dealer and see if he really breaks out his checkbook - "oh you mean you were serious?".
Reply
A.Brien 11:23AM (6/27/2008)
There is two kind of electric cars, battery and hydrogen fuelcell . Hydrogen fuelcell should cost less because it's way lighther, it should even cost less then an ice car.
Reply
Don A 11:37AM (6/27/2008)
ALEXNC
Might want to take a look at the capabilities of the Volt.
Reply
seth 11:38AM (6/27/2008)
@alexNC
the solution is you buy the electric, and use zipcar, taxi, borrow a friends car, or buy a scooter for when you need the gas engine.
Reply
Andy 11:49AM (6/27/2008)
It amazes me how so few people have grasped the total cost of ownership advantage with electric cars.
It's been said many times before that an electric car without battery will cost equal or less than an ICE vehicle of comparable performance.
It just boils down to the cost of battery, cost of gasoline and cost of electricity. You go figure it out yourselves. With a battery at $500 per KWh, I reckon total cost of ownership is just about competetive with gasoline for many US customers today. (It depends on your type of usage)
With a battery at $300 per KWh, electric drive will be cost competetive for the majority.
Don't get hung up on range. Every customer has a different usage pattern and range requirement. When the price of the battery per KWh is competetive for you. You will just buy what you want/need.
The automakers know this. They don't have the battery cost down yet. They also haven't figured out how to market the value proposition to the masses and turn a buck at the same time.
They will mis-inform, bluff and bluster you until they have viable product with go to market plan.
Patience friends. Learn more about total cost of ownership.
Reply
David Wright 12:03PM (6/27/2008)
A lot of car owners/users WILL be sitting down and doing the calculation. I certainly am.
I bought my last car new and kept it nearly 8 years. My current car I bought new 3 years ago and will likely keep at least 2-3 years yet.
My gasoline bill this year equates to about 15% of what a similar new car would cost me to buy. Electricity at current rates would cost me about 2.5% of the car price. In just over 8 years my fuel cost saving would pay 100% of the car price.
Reply
AlexNC 12:04PM (6/27/2008)
@DonA
Yeah, the Volt and Aptera are the only two have a chance to win over Americans in my opinion. Americas desire to have high mileage, long range, low cost vehicles is a Volt style car. There will always be a need for a fuel based generator to allow for longer trips. This is the only method I see Americans accepting. I truly think the Volt is the model for the future car, even long term. I can see a day when 90% of our travel is done with he battery portion of the car, and the other long distance portion is done with ethanol. The only problem right now is the cost. Hopefully our government will step up and see the benefits of subsidizing these styles of cars to get us off of foreign oil.
Reply