IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdl/itsdav/qt7vh184rw.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Are Batteries Ready for Plug-in Hybrid Buyers?

Author

Listed:
  • Axsen, Jonn
  • Burke, Andy
  • Kurani, Kenneth S

Abstract

The notion persists that battery technology and cost remain as barriers to commercialization of electric-drive passenger vehicles. Within the context of starting a market for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs), we explore two aspects of the purported problem: (1) PHEV performance goals and (2) the abilities of present and near-term battery chemistries to meet the resulting technological requirements. We summarize evidence stating that battery technologies do not meet the requirements that flow from three sets of influential PHEV goals due to inherent trade-offs among power, energy, longevity, cost, and safety. However, we also show that part of this battery problem is that those influential goals are overly ambitious compared to goals derived from consumers’ PHEV designs. We elicited PHEV designs from potential early buyers among U.S. new car buyers; most of those who are interested in a PHEV are interested in less technologically advanced PHEVs than assumed by experts. Using respondents’ PHEV designs, we derive peak power density and energy density requirements and show that current battery chemistries can meet them. By assuming too aggressive PHEV goals, existing policy initiatives, battery research, and vehicle development programs mischaracterize the batteries needed to start commercializing PHEVs. To answer the question whether batteries are ready for PHEVs, we must first answer the question, ‘‘whose PHEVs?’’

Suggested Citation

  • Axsen, Jonn & Burke, Andy & Kurani, Kenneth S, 2010. "Are Batteries Ready for Plug-in Hybrid Buyers?," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt7vh184rw, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    • Handle: RePEc:cdl:itsdav:qt7vh184rw
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/7vh184rw.pdf;origin=repeccitec
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bunch, David S. & Bradley, Mark & Golob, Thomas F. & Kitamura, Ryuichi & Occhiuzzo, Gareth P., 1993. "Demand for clean-fuel vehicles in California: A discrete-choice stated preference pilot project," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 237-253, May.
    2. repec:cdl:itsdav:qt56x845v4 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Bettman, James R & Luce, Mary Frances & Payne, John W, 1998. "Constructive Consumer Choice Processes," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 25(3), pages 187-217, December.
    4. repec:cdl:itsdav:qt4491w7kf is not listed on IDEAS
    5. repec:cdl:itsdav:qt1bp83874 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Turrentine, Thomas S. & Kurani, Kenneth S., 2007. "Car buyers and fuel economy?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 1213-1223, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Axsen, Jonn & Kurani, Kenneth S. & Burke, Andrew, 2010. "Are batteries ready for plug-in hybrid buyers?," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 173-182, May.
    2. Ozaki, Ritsuko & Sevastyanova, Katerina, 2011. "Going hybrid: An analysis of consumer purchase motivations," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 2217-2227, May.
    3. Axsen, Jonn & Kurani, Kenneth S., 2013. "Hybrid, plug-in hybrid, or electric—What do car buyers want?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 532-543.
    4. repec:cdl:itsdav:qt9361r9h7 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Schuitema, Geertje & Anable, Jillian & Skippon, Stephen & Kinnear, Neale, 2013. "The role of instrumental, hedonic and symbolic attributes in the intention to adopt electric vehicles," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 39-49.
    6. Mueller, Michel G. & de Haan, Peter, 2009. "How much do incentives affect car purchase? Agent-based microsimulation of consumer choice of new cars--Part I: Model structure, simulation of bounded rationality, and model validation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 1072-1082, March.
    7. Axsen, Jonn & Kurani, Kenneth S, 2010. "Anticipating plug-in hybrid vehicle energy impacts in California: Constructing consumer-informed recharge profiles," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt3h69n0cs, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    8. Bailey, Joseph & Axsen, Jonn, 2015. "Anticipating PEV buyers’ acceptance of utility controlled charging," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 29-46.
    9. repec:cdl:itsdav:qt9zt4g01t is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Collantes, Gustavo, 2010. "Do green tech policies need to pass the consumer test?: The case of ethanol fuel," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1235-1244, November.
    11. repec:cdl:itsdav:qt8p32d18k is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Wolinetz, Michael & Axsen, Jonn, 2017. "How policy can build the plug-in electric vehicle market: Insights from the REspondent-based Preference And Constraints (REPAC) model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 238-250.
    13. Hardman, Scott & Shiu, Eric & Steinberger-Wilckens, Robert & Turrentine, Thomas, 2017. "Barriers to the adoption of fuel cell vehicles: A qualitative investigation into early adopters attitudes," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 166-182.
    14. Seiho Kim & Jaesik Lee & Chulung Lee, 2017. "Does Driving Range of Electric Vehicles Influence Electric Vehicle Adoption?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-15, October.
    15. Costanza Nosi & Tommaso Pucci & Cecilia Silvestri & Barbara Aquilani, 2017. "Does Value Co-Creation Really Matter? An Investigation of Italian Millennials Intention to Buy Electric Cars," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-21, November.
    16. Axsen, Jonn & Orlebar, Caroline & Skippon, Stephen, 2013. "Social influence and consumer preference formation for pro-environmental technology: The case of a U.K. workplace electric-vehicle study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 96-107.
    17. Hyowon Kim & Dong Soo Kim & Greg M. Allenby, 2020. "Benefit Formation and Enhancement," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 419-468, December.
    18. repec:cdl:uctcwp:qt15f9495j is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Berliner, Rosaria, 2018. "Drivers of Change in a World of Mobility Disruption: An Overview of Long Distance Travel, Shared Mobility, and Automated Vehicles," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt6r64v86z, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    20. Martinovici, A., 2019. "Revealing attention - how eye movements predict brand choice and moment of choice," Other publications TiSEM 7dca38a5-9f78-4aee-bd81-c, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    21. Ito, Nobuyuki & Takeuchi, Kenji & Managi, Shunsuke, 2019. "Do battery-switching systems accelerate the adoption of electric vehicles? A stated preference study," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 85-92.
    22. James Agarwal & Wayne DeSarbo & Naresh K. Malhotra & Vithala Rao, 2015. "An Interdisciplinary Review of Research in Conjoint Analysis: Recent Developments and Directions for Future Research," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 2(1), pages 19-40, March.
    23. Larson, Paul D. & Viáfara, Jairo & Parsons, Robert V. & Elias, Arne, 2014. "Consumer attitudes about electric cars: Pricing analysis and policy implications," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 299-314.
    24. Zheyin (Jane) Gu & Giri K. Tayi, 2023. "Consumer self‐design and brand competition," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 32(8), pages 2420-2437, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cdl:itsdav:qt7vh184rw. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Lisa Schiff (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/itucdus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.