Slashdot Mirror


Why Most Electric Cars Are Leased, Not Owned (bloomberg.com)

Bloomberg's research shows that drivers in the U.S. lease almost 80 percent of battery-powered vehicles and 55 percent of plug-in hybrids. "The lease rate for the country's entire fleet hovers around 30 percent," reports Bloomberg, noting that Tesla does not divulge how many of its vehicles are leased since it sells its cars directly rather than through dealerships. From the report: The lopsided consumer preference for leases is fueled by the meager demand for battery-powered vehicles on the used market. Partly this is a consequence of public policy meant to spur electric vehicle adoptions: buyers of pre-owned cars can't grab thousands of dollars in federal and state incentives. The high lease rate is also fueled by the bet [many] are making that upcoming models will far exceed today's in value and capabilities. Perhaps electric vehicles will truly arrive when they are no longer compared to smartphones, which become obsolete after three years.

7 of 206 comments (clear)

  1. Yeh no shit by beelsebob · · Score: 5, Informative

    No shit. I lease my eGolf. Why - I leased it 2 years ago, and could get an 80 mile range car. Today for the same price I could get a 240 mile range car from Chevrolet, or a slightly nicer 120 mile range car from VW. I'm sure in a further 3-4 years I'll be able to get a 400 mile range car for the same price again.

    It'd be completely crazy to bind yourself into a technology that's advancing so quickly at the moment.

    1. Re:Yeh no shit by ginoledesma · · Score: 5, Informative

      I agree. The improvements in battery tech from one generation to another is significant, in that it can be lifestyle-changing. Range anxiety can be a real and frustrating issue to deal with.

      I helped a friend go a different approach for an EV-as-a-commuter/second car option: Buy used, and the price drop from a lot of off-lease vehicles can be significant (e.g. Fiat 500e, Nissan Leaf, Chevrolet Volt, Mitsubishi i-Miev, BMW i3, etc).

      Some back-of-the-napkin math using a Nissan Leaf as an example:

      • 2017 lease: $229/month for 36 months + $2,000 at signing = $10,244 + taxes + etc
      • 2014 off-lease purchase with ~32K miles: $8,500-$11,000 using Kelly Blue Book / Private Party valuation

      Some areas even give additional incentives, even to pre-owned buyers (e.g. $500 PG&E Clean Fuel Rebate), and older EVs may still have the Clean Air Vehicle (CAV) sticker that may eventually phase out in January 2019 in California.

      If you're patient and do your research, you might find a very good deal that may work to your advantage. My friend ended up getting a 2013 Fiat 500e with 27,000 miles for $6400 after taxes and rebates. Decent commuter vehicle, and the owner gets to enjoy company-provided charge stations (so effectively "free miles" while employed).

    2. Re:Yeh no shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A conventional automobile, properly maintained, can last for a very long time and repairs can be performed incrementally. Any component that fails can be replaced with a used part from a junk yard if you want to save money, so used vehicles are still quite valuable,

      Electric vehicles have a very expensive component -- the battery pack -- that cannot be repaired. Once it reaches end of life it must be replaced, you have no choice. This makes used electric vehicles much less attractive because they have a very expensive, unavoidable cost lurking in the future. Ultimately it affects the sale of new vehicles as well -- most people don't want to buy a car that nobody will want when they need to trade it in for a new one.

      Maybe someday this problem with be solved, but it's still a very long way off.

    3. Re:Yeh no shit by beelsebob · · Score: 4, Informative

      70mpg is far from better milage - my eGolf gets 129mpge. And that's before you consider the fact that my employer pays for all the electricity to charge it.

      I ended up paying a total of slightly less than $5000 over 3 years to own the car, including all fuel for it. To drive 30,000 miles in a petrol car would have cost me $3000 in fuel alone, further, the value of the car would have depreciated by far more than $5000 across 3 years. Long story short - sure I "paid money for nothing"... if you ignore the utility of having a car for 3 years. I in fact got a far better deal than if I'd paid money for something.

      And that's all ignoring your idiotic "ride a motorbike, turn yourself into a road crayon" idea. I'll pass on having a 35 times higher likelihood of being seriously injured thanks.

  2. Re:Battery life? by mspohr · · Score: 4, Informative

    My 2015 Tesla S still has 96% of the original battery capacity after 60,000 miles. I'm happy I bought it since leasing is expensive and I don't see getting rid of this car for a long time.
    OTOH, I have heard that Leaf batteries don't last long since they don't have a good battery management system.
    Leasing is sensible with EVs since the technology is changing fast. Tesla's are good since I get monthly software updates and the battery is good.

    --
    I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
  3. Re:Battery life? by geoskd · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Isn't there something about lithium-ion batteries having a 3-year shelf/life

    Un-conditioned lithium batteries tend to have a relatively low life, as measured both in charge/discharge cycles, and in total lifespan. Cell phones have this problem because the cost of Battery conditioning hardware, and the space/weight of such equipment makes it unacceptable for cellphones. As a result, Cell phone batteries (and for similar reasons, laptop batteries) have a useful lifespan of only a few years.

    Car batteries by contrast feature bettery conditioning which maintains temperature conditions in the battery within an ideal operating range which greatly extends the lifespan of the battery (3x to 5x improvement).

    --
    I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
  4. Leasing EVs is generally cheaper than buying by Solandri · · Score: 5, Interesting

    To understand why, you have to understand the economics of EVs. The real economics - not the "EV sales are rising because more people want them" rose-tinted version its proponents like to believe.

    EV sales are taking off because of CARB (California Air Resources Board). They have a ZEV mandate (zero emissions vehicles - mostly EVs though Toyota has a hydrogen vehicle on the market). Beginning in 2013 or 2014, CARB required a certain percentage of each manufacturer's vehicle sales to be ZEVs or PZEVs (partial ZEVs - basically plug-in hybrids). The percentage goes up every year. The formula is a bit complex but it's about 2% ZEVs for 2018, and supposed to reach over 15% by 2025.

    If a manufacturer fails to reach this percentage, the manufacturer must buy ZEV credits from another manufacturer which exceeded its required quota. This is what keeps Tesla afloat. Since they only sell ZEVs, they always have excess credits which they sell to other manufacturers who didn't sell enough ZEVs. That's right - if you buy an ICE vehicle, you are likely subsidizing someone buying a $70,000 Tesla. This is also why Tesla is in no hurry to ramp up Tesla 3 production. They don't want to flood the ZEV credit market - that would devalue their own credits. So they're going to ramp up production just barely fast enough to keep up with how many credits other manufacturers need to buy to comply with CARB's requirement.

    If the manufacturer fails to sell enough EVs or buy enough ZEV credits, they are banned from selling cars in California. Since about a dozen states automatically adopt CARB's rules, that ban would extend to about 1/3 of the U.S. by population. No manufacturer wants to be banned from that huge chunk of the market, so they do whatever they can to sell enough EVs to comply with CARB's ZEV mandate. This means sales, discounts, incentives, whatever it takes to get however many EVs they need into buyers' hands to satisfy CARB's requirements. This is why the EV deals are better in California than in other states - CARB only counts EVs which are sold in California. So California is where automakers offer the biggest EV incentives. I almost pulled the trigger on a 3-year e-Golf lease in 2016 for $500 down, $79/mo in Los Angeles (the Bay Area had zero down, $79/mo available).

    Since EVs are not actually popular with buyers (at least not at the percentage the ZEV mandate requires), this means the manufacturers have to sell the vehicles at below true market value to generate sufficient sales (sometimes even below manufacturing cost). If they're going to do this, leasing it is preferable to selling it. With a sale, they've lost the entire manufacturing cost of the vehicle. With a lease, they at least get the materials for the vehicle back at the end, which they can then reuse or recycle. And if the blue book value of the EV is less at the end of the lease than was projected, they can write off the difference and get a tax deduction for the loss. Leasing also allows anyone to take advantage of the full $7500 federal tax credit. Being a tax credit, you have to owe at least $7500 in income taxes to take full advantage of it. Based on IRS tax stats, this means the buyer needs to make more than about $70,000/yr to take advantage of the full tax credit. But if you lease it, the tax credit goes to the car manufacturer, who pays a lot more than $7500 in taxes each year. So they can take advantage of the full credit and pass it on to the buyer. That means the real price for a leased EV for anyone making less than $70,000/yr is often less than for a purchased EV.

    All this is why the blue book value of a used EV is so low. The ZEV mandate only applies to new vehicle sales, not used EVs. The incentives lower the price, effectively causing more new EVs to be sold or leased than would've at the correct market p