Mitsubishi iMiEV price cut, plug-in hybrid version coming
by Sebastian Blanco on Jun 23rd 2009 at 9:27AM 
Mitsubishi i MiEV - Click above for high-res image gallery
With incentives, Mitsubishi's all-electric i MiEV car will cost about $31,300 when it goes on sale in Japan later this year. That's a pile of cash for the zero-tailpipe emissions car. The good news is that Mitsubishi's president has announced that it plans to cut the price in half (!) by the "mid-2010s," according to Bloomberg. Since the pre-incentive price is in the mid-$40,000s, the price for the i MiEV should be around $21,000 in five or so years. Another surprise: a plug-in hybrid i MiEV will go on sale in 2013. Will it be called the MiPHEV? Thanks to Yanquetino for the tip!
Gallery: i MiEV
[Source: Bloomberg]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
guyledouche 9:53AM (6/23/2009)
Wonderful news! Now all of you EV nay sayers that have been hanging your pessimistic hats on the "Too expensive" argument, can officially shove it!!
EV's will be the answer to our problem in a short amount of time as economies of scale are reached and adoption/production continues to increase. The age of the EV is coming soon to a dealer near you!
Very exciting times in the automotive and environmentally friendly segments.
I cant say enough positive comments for Mitsu for leading this path among the rest of their larger MFG cronies. It will pay off for them handsomely in more ways than one.
Reply
polo 10:35AM (6/23/2009)
Five years?? BBBUHBUH thats hydrogen cars are supposed to come out!
nobody will buy one of these things when you can get a hydrogen car with an affordable 240 year lease. with a hydrogen car you can fill up in 5seconds and go a hundred miles. mitsubishi is going to get clawburred!
Reply
polo 10:36AM (6/23/2009)
oops meant a "thousand miles" not a "hundred"
Mark 1:34PM (6/23/2009)
Hydrogen cars will be here just in time for fusion power plants to generate the hydrogen.
Both are always "coming soon" to a planet near you.
Ernie 3:11PM (6/23/2009)
Yeah, but "hundred" is far more accurate than "thousand".
You can't go a thousand miles on a tank of *gas*, let alone much less dense hydrogen fuel.
But then maybe you were trying to be sarcastic. :)
MT 10:45AM (6/23/2009)
Hydrogen cars have been five years away for 20 years and counting.
Reply
SavinGreen 11:03AM (6/23/2009)
I'm not sure how far out hydrogen cars are, but both of these technologies still will suffer from the same two issues - cost and infrastructure. The cost will come down with the economy of scale once more are being produced.
The infrastructure is a major issue for both. Hydrogen will be very far off as the transport and delivery will be a major investment to make it available to the average driver. The implementation of charging stations for EV's could come quicker and at less cost but then there's the question of where the electricity comes from.
Charging EV's with electricity from coal fired power plant's is not a path to a cleaner environment. This is the next area that will need serious innovation to complete the cycle.
www.SavinGreen.com
Reply
guyledouche 11:11AM (6/23/2009)
SavinGreen,
You really cant compare H2 and EV's based on infrastructure. That is half the reason why H2 cars will never come to fruition, the refueling stations are too costly to build/retrofit and maintain. The infrastructure for EV's however already exists!
Do you have a home with a driveway or garage?
Do you have a parking spot with access to electricity to be run over to it?
If you answered yes to either of the aforementioned questions, you are a perfect candidate for an EV. ding ding ding ding WINNER!!!!!!
Seriously though, you are comparing two totally different things, IMHO. Beyond overnight recharging at ones home, EV recharging would also be much easier to implement at public places like malls, shopping centers, parks, etc... Whereas H2 would basically be impossible.
EV's are the answer, like it or not, at least in the foreseeable future to our current transportation needs and dwindling fossil fuel supply.
MT 11:22AM (6/23/2009)
If we have to account for where the energy comes from to charge EV's, we also have to discuss where the energy come from to produce and pressurize Hydrogen. Hydrogen is simply a storage medium because you have to input energy to get it into a usable form.
On the EV side, studies have already shown that the worst case of EV's charged from coal power is as on par with or cleaner than today's gas vehicles. In places like CA or the Pacific NW where a sizeable % of electricity comes from renewable sources, EV's are much cleaner. And they continue to get cleaner as more renewables are phased in. This tired argument is not a reason to delay the migration to electrified transport,
SavinGreen 11:25AM (6/23/2009)
I agree with you that on the surface the cost of implementing a H2 refueling infrastructure would be much more expensive and take much longer than simply adding outlets to parking facilities, gas stations, or even your own driveway or garage.
The fact is, though, that in order to remove the fossil fuels from the cycle, one needs to consider where the electricity comes from. Just because you don't see the fossil fuels being burned when the electricity comes magically out of your outlet does not mean that it is a "clean" fuel.
When we look at the infrastructure that is needed to replace the sources of the electricity with cleaner sources, we see that the time and cost will grow and rival that of other alternative fuels. It may still not rival the cost of H2, but it will be expensive.
http://www.SavinGreen.com
polo 1:27PM (6/23/2009)
Savingreen, whats your point? We still have coal so therefore EVs are useless? I guess you are riding a bike right now? Most people like EVs for the eliminated gas refuels, the reduced transportation bill, the very low depreciation value, the very low maintenance costs, and the eliminated tailpipe emissions (that can't be scrubbed).
Assuming you're not a hypocrite and you'll only drive a car if it comes from 100% renewable energy sources, your solution is as easy as (a) moving to a locale that offers it (many areas do), or (b) ride your bike for the next 50 years until every coal plant goes offline. Good luck.
SavinGreen 2:23PM (6/23/2009)
My point is not to say that EVs are useless. I think they are the future of the automobile (at least the most realistic based on today's technologies). My point is simply to say that we as a society need to also commit to a cleaner method of electricity generation so that the growth of the EV population can be utilizing something other than fossil fuels.
I do not think this need to switch more of the capacity for electricity generation is a reason to delay the EV. I actually think the introduction of more EVs will help to promote switching.
My original statement merely said that my opinion is our nation's electricity generation will need a lot of investment to actually remove the fossil fuels and emissions from the whole cycle.
mel 2:54PM (6/23/2009)
already done, here is where you get your clean electrons:
http://investor.firstsolar.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=201491&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1259614&highlight=
Richard in FLA 4:53PM (6/23/2009)
SavinGreen, it's very short sighted of you to think that emissions from coal fired plants is the only concern. Let's not forget the political unrest of the world caused by the tremendously profitable foreign oil industry. Our insatiable consumption of oil has fueled the unrest of many terrorists. US and Canadian coal doesn't have that effect. Electric cars fueled by coal powered plants is a much more desirable scenario than to continue to fuel Terrorist countries. The tipping point of EV's is our future. Let's not forget the whole picture, not just some aspects.
Lou Grinzo 11:27AM (6/23/2009)
The infrastructure problem for EVs is much smaller than it is for HFCVs.
How many households in the US alone have [1] more than one vehicle, [2] a garage with a 110V receptacle for overnight charging, and [3] would gladly replace at least one of their vehicles with a $20K EV that could go "only" 100 miles on a charge. It's easily in the millions (including me and at least a half dozen of my neighbors), more than enough to soak up the EV production for the first couple of years, likely longer.
And how will the infrastructure be built out? Some of it will no doubt be municipal projects, but I'm guessing that a lot will be private because the cost per fueling station (i.e. socket) and per unit of charge are both so low. Companies and educational institutions that want to look green will add free sockets to their employee parking lots. Hotel chains will provide free recharging to guests. Shopping malls will likely provide discount recharging to look green and draw customers. This kind of decentralized recharging infrastructure, spurred on by competitive pressures and greenwashing, will spring up much quicker than most people are assuming once those early adopters I mentioned above start showing up in the market.
Both of these factors create a "soft launch" capability for EVs in the US that HFCVs simply don't have or can't do at nearly the same low entry cost. The problem isn't that HFCVs won't work, it's that they can't compete.
Reply
paulwesterberg 12:38PM (6/23/2009)
The miev has a good chance to become the ipod of cars.
High speed capable, with a small form factor and decent range make it a good commuter car. Very few moving parts reduces maintenance costs and low fuel costs could make it affordable despite the slightly higher initial purchase price.
occ 1:06PM (6/23/2009)
I've not heard of any official lines trying to price H2 cars, let alone trying to complete with a $20K future BEV. Lease or buy, it will be significantly cheaper than FCV.
There's hardly any H2 fueling infrastructures of any practicality, whereas every garage is an EXISTING fueling station for BEV. I see private businesses will spur more charging infrastructure by saying "come shop here and charge your BEV for free!". Any business you know will do that for H2 fueling stations (besides oil companies)?
It has already been said, but need to be said again to counter old argument about just pushing CO2/pollution into coal power plant by moving to BEV: 100% coal electric BEV is on par with current gas auto. But we DON'T have 100% coal electricity in the US, and renewable are phasing in all the time! Even H2 can't compete here since the cheapest H2 is from reformation of natural gas - you're better off burning it in CNG vehicles.
C'on Mitsu...bring the iMiEV to the US already! There's so much pent up demand for affordable EV that the first company to hit the market will win big (Tesla S is not considered affordable, and looks like the time frame is the same as the iMiEV).
Reply
Snowdog 1:28PM (6/23/2009)
Infrastructure for EVs will grow naturally. Rising demand will force more production online. It isn't like everyone is going to switch in even 20 years let alone overnight. There will be plenty of time to adapt the grid to the growth of electric cars. You can probably get fairly far with smart metering and off peak charging alone.
Complaining about where the electricity comes from now that we have EVs coming is a red herring. Even in the worse power generation jurisdictions, EVs are still cleaner than gas powered cars. Not only that but you don't have to worry about maintaining a whole fleet of emission controls. You just need to go to the source of generation. Not only that, but you remove it from urban centers full of peoples. Sure we could use better generations sources, but EVs are still better in every way from a pollution perspective.
For a home owner looking for a city commuter, the infrastructure is already there, it's a plug in his driveway or garage.
Reply
Mart 9:41PM (6/23/2009)
The only possible competition for the i-MiEV (Jeez, can't they get a better name?) in the U.S. market for the next five years might be possible releases by Nissan or Th!nk. Hopefully, Nissan won't stick with the Denki Cube in Snyrna. I'd accept the loss of the back seat in a Th!nk for the additional range and headroom.
fnc 4:24PM (6/23/2009)
People always cry about electricity coming from coal, then fail to mention that the gasoline in your tank isn't just put in there by magical fairies. I imagine plenty of oil got burned getting some of it from a well (possibly halfway around the world) into that tank under the gas station. And it's not like there was any option to make that particular distribution chain any cleaner either, supertankers and tanker rigs won't be running on solar or wind power anytime soon. We'll still need them, but hopefully we'll need -less- of them as more EV's hit the road.