Leaf 5 Year Total Cost of Ownership Less Than Prius?

[Stoaty]

I haven't studied the article, but here it is:

http://www.businessweek.com/innovation/the-cleantech-threshold-09082011.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[edatoakrun]

I believe LEAF savings will likely be even greater in the longer term, for many. See the ancient thread below:

Compare Electric Car to Hybrid, Diesel & Gas CarsPosted: Tue Mar 01, 2011 10:56 am


You may want to recheck total LEAF ownership costs using the calculator, entering current or future (?) gas prices.

http://www.befrugal.com/tools/electric-car-calculator/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Entering my own anticipated driving pattern and electricity costs (PG&E off-peak, $.06 per kWH), and entering $4.00 gas, results show total 15 year ownership costs of $32,200 for a LEAF, vs $46,300 for a PRIUS and $51,800 for a Ford (gas) focus.

Outright purchase, with Federal Tax credit and CA $5,000 rebate included, default maintenence cost estrimates as provided.

I believe these figures may understate the LEAF ownership cost advantage, as the residual/resale value (which is not included in this calculator) of all EV's will likely be superior to ICEV's.


http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=1725" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[adric22]

Finally somebody checked their facts before writing an article about EVs..

I'm so tired of seeing all of the articles talking about the limitations of the vehicle.. It reminds me of the 1990's when people kept saying stuff like "These DVD players will never sell because they can't record" or "these digital cameras will never sell because you can't get prints made." and stupid stuff like that. Or how about "These flat screen monitors will never sell because they are too expensive."

Well, all of these people forgot to take into account the products advantages and then weigh them next to their disadvantages. I guess the problem is that people are used to change that brings improvements all around. For example you go from an iPad to an iPad 2. The price is the same, but the iPad 2 is thinner, faster, has cameras, etc. And since the original iPad was successful, surely the iPad 2 will be even more successful.

Other technology is more questionable. When you bring in a new technology that offers some great advantage, but also introduces a disadvantage, then suddenly many people think the product will not sell. Well, it turns out that people didn't care that much about DVD's inability to record after all. I guess not as many people used their VHS players for recording TV shows after all. I think the same will be true of EVs. Eventually people will realize that 100 miles range REALLY IS enough for 95% of the population.

 

[Train]

It reminds me of the 1990's when people kept saying stuff like "These DVD players will never sell because they can't record" or "these digital cameras will never sell because you can't get prints made."

I never heard anyone say that. Ever. Products will sell based on their merits. This is a new car with new technology that's priced, with tax, destination, fees, at about $40,000. DVD players were $500 or more when they came out. Early adopters bought those players and early adopters will buy an electric car at any price.

100 mile range will NOT be enough for 95% of the population. A population that includes millions who live in apts or other areas who have no access to charging outlets. Millions who can only afford or have one car. Millions who already have a car and like not making a car payment. Millions who don't have a job and couldn't afford a cheap car let alone an expensive one. Millions who understand that this is a meaningless statistic just thrown out there by people who advocate for EV's. It's those many extra days where you need more range where you can't be inconvenienced and have to run a bunch of errands, worried about if you can make the next 10 miles with your children in the car, and can't go for that weekend getaway because it's too far.

The masses will not pay almost $40 grand, somewhat less with some incentives, for a car with a realistic 75 mile range. If you already have a car that paid for or half paid off, it makes zero financial sense to buy a new one. At $15-18K, the masses will take a look at a car that uses electricity and has a 75 mile range. At almost $40K, it won't even be considered.

Someday the price of an electric car will equal its value to most consumers and then, and only then, will they buy them and realize any savings.

We're not talking about hundreds of dollars and Ipads. We're talking about a $40,000 car that gets a realistic 75-80 miles to a charge. Telling people how much they'll save in year five won't even be a consideratiion for the general populace. A Prius would make far more sense for most people.

 

[johnr]

Sounds like a good analysis, but it seems he does not factor in the huge rebates that pertain to an all-electric car such as the Leaf. When you include that, the Leaf costs only a little more than a Prius from the start, and therefore it pays for itself even faster.

Of course, the Leaf isn't for everyone. Why? Because quick-charge infrastructure is not yet prevalent. In the mean time, for those who regularly travel more than 80 miles or so at a time (that's a really a rather small percentage of the population who travel so much) there is the option of a Prius or even an economy car. In a few years, when quick-chargers are everywhere, electric cars will win hands-down.

 

[Train]

The author of this article is just referring to a web calculator that doesn't detail any items of ownership, maintenance and cost in any detailed way. This is hardly any analysis at all.

 

[smkettner]

I would like to see a list of maintenance cost. And I don't mean from the factory scheduled maintenance guides. How about those 3000 mile dealer oil change recommendations. What about the minor service every 15,000 that is a total rip where the dealer charges a bundle to check the belts and wash fluid. How about the dealer recommending brakes when the pads are 50% worn, the list is endless.

 

[Herm]

I believe LEAF savings will likely be even greater in the longer term, for many. See the ancient thread below:

Its impossible to know what the TCO of the Leaf will be, we dont know for sure how long the battery will last and how much a replacement will cost, all we can do is guess.. my guess is that some people will get a long life out of their battery and some wont. We have no idea of how much the resale value of a Leaf will be without that information.

 

[lonndoggie]

It reminds me of the 1990's when people kept saying stuff like "These DVD players will never sell because they can't record" or "these digital cameras will never sell because you can't get prints made."

I never heard anyone say that. Ever.

Of course not, you weren't listening. Ever.

Back then, I was reviewing audio equipment for Stereophile magazine, and that was indeed one complaint against DVD players. There were others; you can read here an article comparing an analysis of why the DVD would fail in the marketplace, written back at that time, compared with arguments against blu-ray adoption. Can't record was definitely one of them, and like most of the arguments, it looks pretty silly now.

One that didn't look silly was the initial price; the first DVD players were $1,000 and up--in 1996 dollars. The prices dropped quickly, of course. In '83 when Sony introduced the first CD player it was $1,000. In 1983 dollars! I sure didn't buy one. Probably only made sense for 5% of the people! Dang!

Digital cameras faced market opposition because, in the early days, people didn't understand how they were to get quality prints, because prints were the paradigm they understood, and high-quality computer printers weren't cheap. Also, the cost was high. And the quality per dollar was worse than what you could do with a decent SLR or even a good point-and-shoot.

And there lies the apt comparison here. The usage/value paradigm of an electric car--at least current electric cars--is different than those for an ICE.

To say that an electric car won't work for 95% of the people is crazy talk. Where do you get your figures? May not work as the only car for a significant number of people (millions, even), but it works very well in a two-car household for a large number of people (millions, even). I'm sure some great-great uncle of yours was saying back in the day that the horseless carriage wouldn't work for 95% of the people, too.

As for saving money now--yeah, that'll probably happen for me, vs. if I'd bought some other $24K commuter vehicle, thanks to all the early adopter incentives. The maintenance costs will certainly be lower than any ICE, unless the battery goes seriously bad and battery prices don't drop. Then, it might not be so good. Then again, every ICE I've ever owned I've pumped thousands of dollars into for various water pumps, timing belts, clutches, clutch cables, gaskets, not to mention oil changes, spark plugs, transmission work, radiator flushes, and all kinds of wrench work that won't be required for this car. We'll see.

We can agree--and the analogy holds with other early technology introductions--that over time, as prices decrease and capability increases, that electric cars will make sense for more and more people. As you said.

 

[SanDust]

The good thing about this article is that it introduces the concept of a total cost of ownership. People have far too short a pay back period. They want a payback in six months even for things like refrigerators which they'll have for ten years. Ditto with LCD lightbulbs. It's a human failing.

This at least begins to assess the costs over a five year period rather than what you see in the media, which is: "EVs cost X dollars more than A so people will never buy them", neglecting that over five years the EV may cost LESS than A.

A small but positive step.

 

[JPWhite]

Good to see someone in the press approaching the cost equation in a logical manner.

I did analysis prior to purchase and have kept logs since purchase which validates my earlier assumptions.

http://jpwhitenissanleaf.com/2011/03/28/nissan-leaf-scrunching-the-numbers/
http://jpwhitenissanleaf.com/2011/09/05/on-track-to-save-10000-in-fuel/

I see considerable TCO savings over a Prius. Almost $8,000.

I too would like to see more official maintenance cost savings. My assumptions there could be off by orders of magnitude, there isn't much data from Nissan or anyone else to come up with a decent estimate. Nissan just haven't touted this very much, maybe because they perceive the average consumer only visits a garage when something goes wrong. The demographic here is probably of more conscientious and concerned owners.

 

[edatoakrun]

I believe LEAF savings will likely be even greater in the longer term, for many. See the ancient thread below:

Its impossible to know what the TCO of the Leaf will be, we dont know for sure how long the battery will last and how much a replacement will cost, all we can do is guess.. my guess is that some people will get a long life out of their battery and some wont. We have no idea of how much the resale value of a Leaf will be without that information.

Of course.

And it's also impossible to know what the TCO of an ICEV purchased today will be, primarily because you have no idea what gasoline will cost in the future, and you have no idea if ICEV residual values will match previous levels, if they are superseded by EVs as the dominant player in passenger vehicle sales.

I wonder how well horse-drawn vehicles held their resale value, after they became obsolescent, a century ago...

 

[Herm]

Lots and lots of data on ICE vehicles, we have a pretty good idea of TCO on those. Complicating the matter even more is the Prius, it is incredibly reliable over the long haul. Priuses actually appreciate in value if gasoline goes up

In normal ICE vehicles you start running into big expenses around 100-150k miles, alternators, water pump, major brake rebuilds, the biggies are the major automatic and manual transmission "rebuilds". Then we have a new batch of cars with very sophisticated and complicate automatic transmissions, with expensive direct fuel injection and with turbos.. turbos are probably not much of a worry by now.

if Nissan can get battery life into the 10 year/150k miles range, and a battery replacement cost of about $6k then there is a good chance for BEVs to be cost competitive with ICE vehicles in the long run. Battery costs have to come down before the tax incentives go away also.

 

[edatoakrun]

Herm-Lots and lots of data on ICE vehicles, we have a pretty good idea of TCO on those. Complicating the matter even more is the Prius, it is incredibly reliable over the long haul. Priuses actually appreciate in value if gasoline goes up

Not just Priuses. Historically, the resale value any ICEV, hybrid or not, varies with gasoline prices.
And the resale value of any car that gets 30+mpg increased over the last few years.

The resale values of EV's will also depend on future gas prices. The higher gas prices go, the lower the TCO of an EV.

 

[Herm]

Thats the other darn issue, they keep finding oil.

 

[JPWhite]

I believe LEAF savings will likely be even greater in the longer term, for many. See the ancient thread below:

Its impossible to know what the TCO of the Leaf will be, we dont know for sure how long the battery will last and how much a replacement will cost, all we can do is guess.. my guess is that some people will get a long life out of their battery and some wont. We have no idea of how much the resale value of a Leaf will be without that information.

Of course.

And it's also impossible to know what the TCO of an ICEV purchased today will be, primarily because you have no idea what gasoline will cost in the future, and you have no idea if ICEV residual values will match previous levels, if they are superseded by EVs as the dominant player in passenger vehicle sales.

I wonder how well horse-drawn vehicles held their resale value, after they became obsolescent, a century ago...

We also don't know what the price of electric will be in the future either.

It comes down to making forward looking estimates based upon assumptions that may or may not hod up in practice.

 

[Stoaty]

Thats the other darn issue, they keep finding oil.

Unfortunately, they aren't finding any cheap oil, mainly the hard to get oil = expensive oil. The other problem is that with depletion of existing fields (estimated at 4-5% per year), a lot of new oil has to be found and produced just to keep us on the production plateau we are on now.

 

[youngr3]

My quick calculations show that the costs of operating the Leaf to be equivalent to a $15,000 car getting 35 mpg average when gas is at $3.87/gal. These yearly costs include a linear depreciation value (equivalent to using a residual value). It does not include major maintainence for ICE vehicle or battery repacement costs for the Leaf.

 

[dznit]

*Finding new oil is not the problem.
*Finding new cheap oil is not likely, but is not main problem.
*Global warming (climate change) and air pollution will remain a political (not scientific) debate.
*The main problem is the exponential global oil demand. (i.e. increasing demand is outpacing new finds)
*The "key disclaimer" missing from many claims that we have enough oil for: 20 years, 50 years,
100 years or "pick number of years" is: "At The Current Consumption Rate"

Best explained by: Dr. Albert A. Bartlett's presentation on "Arithmetic, Population, and Energy"
(part 1 of 8)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-QA2rkpBSY" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Worth your time to watch!

 

[edatoakrun]

My quick calculations show that the costs of operating the Leaf to be equivalent to a $15,000 car getting 35 mpg average when gas is at $3.87/gal. These yearly costs include a linear depreciation value (equivalent to using a residual value). It does not include major maintainence for ICE vehicle or battery repacement costs for the Leaf.

For how many years?

The longer you operate an EV, the greater the TOC advantage over an ICEV.

Which is why I believe 2011-12 EV depreciation rates will probably be lower than for 2011-12 ICEVs.

Which car will have a higher resale value in 10 years, a 2011 Altima with 120 k miles that requires $5k a year operating costs, or a 2011 LEAF with 120 k miles, that will likely cost less than half that much to fuel and maintain?