40 percent of Americans ready to plug-in?
Yet only 25 percent are even familiar with EV technology?
The Consumer Electronics Association has found that 40 percent of Americans are likely to test-drive an electric vehicle, citing “environmental and cost-saving benefits.” However, study respondents are also very concerned about range, charging issues and battery longevity.
Interestingly, however, only 25 percent of those surveyed are even familiar with electric vehicle technology.
Unfortunately, without major technological breakthroughs in lithium technologies, battery powered vehicles will not provide the cost-savings respondents are hoping EVs will provide. Inevitably, while manufacturing improvements will decrease costs significantly, commodity pricing will still limit cost-effectiveness compared to conventional technologies according to numerous battery and powertrain studies.
When previous consumer studies have suggested higher prices compared to conventional vehicles, buying interest has declined significantly, even with the potential of long term savings.
Nevertheless, similar to much other research, the CEA study does demonstrate that consumers are very attuned to environmental and energy security concerns. Of course, studies have been suggesting this concern now for decades, with limited real change.
Are things different this time around?


agreed. i’m just saying if the government is going to spend billions on something other than ethanol – pretty much plug-ins these day – perhaps it would be better to set a goal that might advance numerous technologies.
well I don’t think competition is evil but government involvement in create an environment for competition can be tricky if what it does is encourage one direction causing other ones to be neglected – and those others ones may actually have just as much or more promise.
Having watched what the govt did to ethanol….. I was not impressed.
Absolutely. There are a number of very interesting potential breakthroughs on the horizon and any, or even all of them, could occur much sooner than expected.
Yet, isn’t that all the more reason to be pragmatic today? Current technologies and resources enable huge change today, but instead we wait for the holy grail that might take 5 years to achieve its breakthrough, or even a few decades.
Likewise, any number of breakthroughs could rewrite everything and change the game in a way totally unanticipated – making earlier paths and investments instantly obsolete. Again, isn’t that more of a reason to be aggressively pragmatic, while nurturing possible breakthroughs?
We’ve discussed the idea before, but how about a tax credit for any vehicle that achieves 60 mpg on the EPA’s city cycle?
Even the Prius can’t do that. So, either the Prius would have to be made lighter, include plug-in technology, or be made smaller. If made smaller for instance, it would probably be cheaper. So, let’s say it’s base price is $17,500 – a price many are anticipating for one of Toyota’s upcoming hybrids. Plus, it qualifies for a $3000 tax credit. At that price you might start pushing many new consumers to think much differently about the automobile.
Likewise, in the interim, you’re still developing battery technology, and such a hybrid could easily be converted into a plug-in hybrid if a breakthrough occurs. But if it takes a decade or more to achieve that breakthrough, such hybrids would still have a very positive effect. Additionally, such a tax credit would also invite automakers to try totally unique concepts, to use new materials, such as hemp fiber composites. Moreover, biofuels could be given a mileage score based on their sustainability and emissions reductions.
Consequently, we’re still nurturing potential breakthroughs across many different technologies, while achieving change, and not putting too many eggs into one basket.
Seriously, is pragmatism really so bad? Is competition really that evil?
oh…. I think we are one breakthrough away from game-changing …. but we don’t when when (or if) it happens – or something no one had previous thought of – comes to be.
I like going back through the older Popular Mechanics to see what they predicted verses what happened and the truth is there’s a lot they predicted that has not come to be – but there are other things not even on their radar screens that have been game changers.
I’m optimistic about the future but also pragmatic… a real buzzkiller sometimes, eh?
and cold weather and aggressive driving also impact range.
your points really frustrate me, larry. while i very much want to advocate for plug-ins, i feel they’ve become almost a distraction, even worse, an excuse for automakers not to accomplish more with the technologies currently available.
the evidence supporting your claim is literally overwhelming.
i really wish we were on the verge of a massive plug-in revolution, but that’s going to take decades. is there really nothing else that can be done in the interim?
consumers will completely turn off to plug-ins when they discover:
1. – they cost much more
2. – when you run out of “fuel”, you are dead in the water.. with no alternative way to continue to your destination.
I read a review of an EV where the guy said that “in theory” he had X miles which he thought was plenty for his trip – until he turned on the AC and the “X” miles almost immediately went to 1/2 X miles and he spent the rest of the time worrying about whether or not he would make it back home.
I predict that the average person – whether they are American or European or Japanese is not going to sign up for this kind of experience.
As soon as this aspect of owning a plug-in reaches the consciousness of the average person – they’re going to say “no”.
plug-ins with a backup-redundant engine – yes.. but pure EV – not until they have a comparable range and a comparable “re-fuel” time.
the supporters of plug-ins want so much for the transition to take place but the reality is that EVs are not ready for prime time except possibly as super golf-carts in urban areas.
I have no doubt that it will happen one day, but that day is not here yet.