MIT: EVs are close to being cost-effective for most people

According to an article in MIT Technology Review, a new peer reviewed study suggests that battery-powered vehicles are close to being cost-effective for most people: "Electric cars may seem like a niche product that only wealthy people can afford, but a new analysis suggests that they may be close to competing with or even beating gas cars on cost. ... The authors of the new study concluded that the battery packs used by market-leading EV manufacturers like Tesla and Nissan cost as little as $300 per kilowatt-hour of energy in 2014. That's lower than the most optimistic published projections for 2015, and even below the average published projection for 2020. The authors found that batteries appear on track to reach $230 per kilowatt-hour by 2018. If that's true, it would push EVs across a meaningful threshold."

http://www.technologyreview.com/news/536336/inexpensive-electric-cars-may-arrive-sooner-than-you-think/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Interesting, but much like the UN climate report executive summary versus the actual empirical studies they supposedly "summarize," this MIT summary represents a bit of "cherry picking" from the actual study.

What the review says: "The authors of the new study concluded that the battery packs used by market-leading EV manufacturers like Tesla and Nissan cost as little as $300 per kilowatt-hour of energy in 2014"

See, when someone says "as little as" I always want to know: but what's on the other end of that estimate (which could be equally likely)? A look at a key figure from the article shows that even for the market leaders, it could be as high as $700 per kilowatt-hour of energy in 2014 and still be over $300 by 2030*
http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v5/n4/carousel/nclimate2564-f1.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Note also that all the "low cost" estimates are based on the Tesla Model S and that the many fewer Nissan LEAF estimates average considerably higher. The real problem is the estimates of costs very widely and with such inaccurate data, the actual confidence in the estimate is (and should be) very low.

[*]I know Its hard to read the figure they have available online (intentionally), but I should have access at work to an actual copy of the article once its available in the "printed" version and can update this when I know more.

I wonder - were they considering this 'cost-effective' with our without incentives/tax benefits?

Slow1 said:

I wonder - were they considering this 'cost-effective' with or without incentives/tax benefits?

Click to expand...

That is a key factor.
My 2011 LEAF that cost $34,000, but that received $7,500 federal tax credit and $2,500 state rebate on, and that will require at least one $6,500 replacement battery to get 100,000 miles out of it will have a total cost of ownership close to the 2009 Altima that I bought new.
LEAF may be a bit higher, but close and "cost effective".

Without the subsidies it would NOT be cost effective.
Fun, but not cost effective.