Buying An Electric Vehicle For Nothing?

July 25th, 2013 by Jo Borrás

This article originally published on Gas2

New tax incentives are combining with lower retail prices to make the cost of choosing an EV as your next new car almost zero. That claim comes courtesy of the Wall Street Journal, which cites a new round of discount leases on mainstream-brand plug-in cars like the hot-selling Nissan Leaf and Fiat 500e that can be combined with federal, state and local incentives to buy an electric car “could make a battery-electric car an extraordinarily economical way to get around for drivers.”

The esteemed WSJ isn’t saying electric cars are free, of course. What they’re doing, instead, is refuting one of the favorite talking points of “EV haters” (aka “knuckle-dragging, mouth-breathing troglodytes”). That being “electric cars cost more than their gas-powered counterparts, and you’ll never drive it long enough to get your money back.” It’s a stupid, ridiculous, and laughable “argument” I know, but most people are bad at math and “feel like” that makes sense “to them”. So, rather than explain the situation for the umpteenth time, I’ll let the Wall Street Journal present their own anecdotal example, in their words:

Bronson Beisel, 46, says he was looking last fall for an alternative to driving his gas-guzzling Ford Expedition sport utility around suburban Atlanta, when he saw a discounted lease offer for an all-electric Nissan Leaf. With $1,000 down, Mr. Beisel says he got a two-year lease for total out-of-pocket payments of $7,009, a deal that reflects a $7,500 federal tax credit.

As a resident of Georgia, Mr. Beisel is also eligible for a $5,000 subsidy from the state government. Now, he says, his out-of-pocket costs for 24 months in the Leaf are just over $2,000. Factor in the $200 a month he reckons he isn’t paying for gasoline to fill up his hulking SUV, and Mr. Beisel says “suddenly the car puts $2,000 in my pocket.”

Yes, he pays for electricity to charge the Leaf’s 24-kilowatt-hour battery—but not much. “In March, I spent $14.94 to charge the car” and a bit less than that in April, he says. He also got an electric car-charging station installed at his house for no upfront cost.

“It’s like a two-year test drive, free,” he says.

So, what will it take you to buy an electric car, if not “a two-year free trial period”? Math like this, combined with the realization that EVs seem to be much more durable and long-lasting than previously thought, simply adds to what we’ve been about electric cars over the years, and will give mainstream car-buyers a chance to see for themselves that they’ll be just fine with electric cars, about 99% of the time, without taking a big up-front price hit compared to a similarly sized “conventional” car. You can head on over to the Wall Street Journal’s original article, or check out their cost-breakdown infographic, below.

Keep up to date with all the hottest cleantech news by subscribing to our (free) cleantech newsletter, or keep an eye on sector-specific news by getting our (also free) solar energy newsletter, electric vehicle newsletter, or wind energy newsletter.

Tags: EV, Fiat 500E, Gas2, Nissan Leaf, Wall Street Journal, WSJ

About the Author

Jo Borrás I've been involved in motorsports and tuning since 1997, and write for a number of blogs in the Important Media network. You can find me on Twitter, Skype (jo.borras) or Google+.

adakeep

I’ve just taken advantage of the discounted lease from Nissan for the leaf. My out of pocket expense for two year lease is $7800. Gasoline not purchased for my ICE = $350/m or $8400 for two years. I am driving 5mi/kwh so for the 24000 miles I’m allowed for the lease the expense will be $576. And I use it for business so another 51 cents per mile income tax deduction. Add to that the scheduled maintenance that consist of tire rotation and this car is adding to my bank account instead of draining. And…if someone could actually convince me that this is all courtesy of the taxpayers, then I thank the taxpayers from the bottom of my heart. Oh and I am happy to be buying American made electrons, a car made in Smyrna, Tennessee and if the manufacturer is subsidizing the car, then I thank them for pouring Japanese cash into the US.
Frederik

It’s quite a surprise that the WSJ brings this, given that the Rupert Murdoch media normally spread nothing but lies and misinformation about everything that benefits the environment.
- Tom Lahman
  
  This article (that you are responding too) is entirely consistent with your statement. There is nothing free. In the case of EV’s: an exorbitant cost is concealed by the sellers in collusion with government by transferring a significant portion of that cost to the general taxpaying public (national debt). Further, that same public is forced to subsidize the fuel (electricity) produced by public utilities. Most of which are required to integrate solar and wind produced power at a cost substantially higher than conventionally produced power (again which the non participating public is forced to shoulder).
  
  If just 10% of the miles driven in this nation were done in EV’s; this nation’s power production would have to be increased by 40%. I assure you, that can not be achieved by wind and solar and thereby bringing us back to a near doubling of coal consumption. “Green” energy is best defined as “the burning of enormous amounts of taxpayer dollars in order to produce miniscule amounts of energy!
  More at: “Green Poverty”Scribd.com
  - Bob_Wallace
    
    Gosh Tom, that’s a huge pile of poo.
    
    Ever consider the trillions we spend because we use petroleum for transportation? All the tax breaks, low cost land leases and other benefits we taxpayers give oil companies. Or the trillions of dollars we’ve spent fighting three oil wars.
    
    We’ve spent many, many, many times more public money subsidizing fossil fuels and nuclear than subsidizing renewables. The cost of fossil fuels and nuclear keep going up and the price of renewables keeps coming down.
    
    We have enough spare generating capacity and transmission to charge over 70% of the total US car/light truck fleet if our vehicles were turned into electrics overnight.
    
    You must get your news and information from Murdock/Fox/WSJ. You are incredibly wrong.
    
    Probably ought to rename your web site “I’m Ignorant About Green Energy”.
    
    That or “I Lie for the Fossil Fuel Industry”.
  - arne-nl
    
    I’ll ignore all the mindless ranting and address just this easily verifyable claim: “If just 10% of the miles driven in this nation were done in EV’s; this nation’s power production would have to be increased by 40%”
    
    The calculation goes as follows, Tom, and you could have done that yourself in five easy steps:
    
    1. Lookup the number of miles that an EV drives on a kWh of electricity. It turns out the real world figure is around 5 km (3 miles).
    
    2. Lookup the total VMT in the USA. According to the DoE that is 3 trillion miles.
    
    3. Divide 2 by 1 and the outcome is the kWh’s needed. Answer: 1 trillion kWh = 1000 TWh.
    
    4. At the eia you can find that the annual net electricity generation in the US is about 4000 TWh.
    
    5. 1000 TWh is 25% of 4000 TWh.
    
    So your claim is:
    10% EV = 40% increase
    Reality is:
    100% EV = 25% increase.
    
    You exaggerated by a factor of 15.