Hacker News Reader

Comment by rusbus | Hacker News Reader

Anecdotally: I wanted the cheapest possible new car for commuting around the Bay Area. After some research, I found the Spark EV for only $60/month after rebates. With insurance it's only$5/day. I assumed electric cars were defacto expensive until I actually researched it. No idea why more people don't pick up these cars.

(Probably because it only goes 80 miles)

View on HN

Hate to say it but this is part of the problem. There's nothing sustainable about these manufacturer/government sponsored lease deals. California is the biggest offender with the largest incentives and unreal regulations. A car is a long term consumer good, the energy that goes into building one outweighs the 2-3 year leases these cars are offered at loss prices. What happens when these leases are up? Most owners will walk, because why pay big bucks to buy out the car if you can get into another one for $50/month. These cars will end up being bought back en masse by the manufacturers and it's a big question what will happen then. Very likely to be scraped and, again, lots of energy wasted. All thanks to Californias EV credit system.

Edit: lol downvote all you want, the reality won't change. If you understand the economics of these leases (see my other comment) you'll see it too...

Your argument is pretty thin. I would imagine the best way to alleviate your concerns would be to require aggressive recycling programs for an EV.

Long-term, the sale of these cars is allowing the EV market to mature. Already the price of the batteries has gone way down. The nextgen EVs coming out this year and next with 200+ miles of range were only made possible by this "unsustainable" consumer good. Maybe my 2012 EV with 75 miles of range is already in a land-fill somewhere. But a car like a Tesla S keeps its value surprisingly well and should last for quite a while.

The Chevy Bolt is a compelling car that someone could own for a decade. Your main complaint is that the cars are evolving so fast that there are better options available every time your lease is up. Big deal!

I think the battery is the most hazardous component. It's also the most valuable from a recycling perspective.

Firstgen EVs are not popular in the aftermarket: http://blog.caranddriver.com/tesla-aside-resale-values-for-e...

Battery recycling is an emerging market as well: http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1093810_electric-car-bat...

I would argue that aftermarket prices are artificially low for EV's because of the tax credits.

There are quite a few dealers in my area that sell used Nissan Leafs as fast as they can get them in, they are really nice cars for the price. We also happen to have better than average charging infrastructure and most of it is free currently.

You're comparing a 100k luxury Tesla with a $80/month lease. Yes I understand the EV market is maturing and will find more niches while it develops but least not ignore the reality of the $49/month EV (yes you can lease a Golf EV at my local VW dealer for that little). See my other comment on how these leases work and why they're not economically sustainable. There's also the issue of California's EV credits that force every manufacturer to have an EV. Why do you think Fiat sells the 500 EV? Not because the couple thousand they sell a year are worth it economically, I can say that much.

Sorry for mentioning Tesla. I realize it's an annoyingly expensive luxury car. The larger point is that getting a "usable" firstgen EV required getting a luxury car. A nextgen EV with 200+ miles of range will be available for "affordable" prices by the end of this year (from Chevy).

EV incentives weren't meant to be unsustainable. That's why they're limited to 200k cars per manufacturer. Tesla will be the first EV maker to become ineligible for tax credits because they will have hit the limit. They're also the first EV maker to deliver a car that keeps its value. Others will follow this year and next.

How the EV tax credit works: https://cleantechnica.com/2016/04/19/how-the-ev-tax-credit-w...

That makes no sense. Why would the lessor scrap the car rather than sell it at the end of the lease?

Let me explain how these leases work, MSRP for OPs Chevy Spark EV is in the 25k ball park, lessen the 7k government incentives is 18k. If OP is paying 80/mo (we don't know if that payment includes sales tax but let's say even if it doesn't) that's 2880 paid over a typical 3 year/10k mile a year lease. So now the balance on the car is 15k. Looking at cars.com a comparable EV Nissan Leaf (Spark EVs haven't been around for that long) 3 years old with 30k miles are going for 7-10k range. Now who do you think pays for that difference? And that's even assuming these cars all can be sold. Scraping is a bit extreme but is definitely not unheard of. The issue with EVs is that where most ICE cars can be sold at auction and exported to other countries, EVs aren't desirable to that market since there's a lack of infrastructure for them to be usable in, let's say, Latin America or Africa.

I don't follow the maths. A leasing company has a vehicle that they've got 15K "left" to pay off on, and they can only sell it for 10K so they'll just pay money to scrap it instead? How does that make sense for them?

If there is some monetary incentive for them to do this, you've not outlined who is paying it to them. And even if it exists, that's the problem, not the up front incentives.

In the case of these ultra cheap EVs the bank is the financing arm of the manufacturer. Of course no normal financial institution will take such a loss but because of CAFE regulations the only way they can kee selling high profit margin, gas guzzling SUVs is by offering these 'highly sponsored' EVs.

Are you saying they would rather "scrap" the car than get the $7k -$10k? Why in the world would that happen?

Secondly, OP is subtracting the $2,500 rebate from the car payments he's making, so the manufacturer is actually getting ~$6k instead of $3k, which is a significant chunk of the difference between residual and current resale value.

Yes scrapping is a bit extreme and I'm sure someone will buy them for way below the residual value but I just used it to get the point across of the economics of these cheap leases. It just doesn't add up.

> It just doesn't add up.

Yes it does, you're just a variable: California requires car companies to sell a certain number of EVs in order to sell other cars in the state.

So companies take their cheapest model, convert it into a passable EV, then their financing arm offers nice incentives to get them out the door and the parent company eats the difference as a cost of doing business in California.

Exactly, what I mean by doesn't add up is not sustainable long term. I really wonder in 1-2 years from now when all these EVs flood the market. 3 year old Leafs already sell for 6-7k, crazy!

California is not the only electric car market, I think they will phase out the subsidies there over time. They were jump starting the market in a useful direction. That's all that these rebates are trying to do. In July 2012, even the tesla model s had not come outer - that is slightly more than 4 years ago. Look at all the choices now! It's amazing to me how well cali rules plus the us tax subsidies kick started the market.

People buy teslas, leafs, i3s everything in my northwest state and we don't have a state rebate or requirement like California. Leafs were ~$250/month here. You see tons of them; when they increase the range a bit, I predict sales will really go up.

The tax subsidies were never meant to be a long term solution, so they don't need to be "sustainable," whatever you mean by that.

Not commenting on the merits of CA or Federal tax credits, but these cars end up getting sold as used cars in states that don't have tax credits. They still have value and are definitely not being scrapped.

One reason might be that it's just not available in their area. I just went looking at the Chevy Spark EV (since it was so low in the charts and base price both) and find it's only available in participating dealers in like 3 or 4 states.

Yeah, that would explain a lot:

Available At Participating Dealers In California, Oregon And Maryland In Limited Quantities.

>(Probably because it only goes 80 miles)

Which for the majority of 2 car households is all you need for the second car.

I drive my car (our designated second car) an average of just 12 miles per day. Fuel economy is an extremely low priority since it's dwarfed by other costs. Reliability is my number one priority - if I don't have to pay to repair it very often, it will still be in the driveway for another 15 years (yes - it's 15 years old and has close to 200k miles on it). At this point, I'm also saving the environment by keeping it out of the junkyard.

EDIT: I should also mention that when the wind is favorable, it's also responsible for towing my yacht to the water - something a small plugin hybrid will never do.

Quite true, and since its cheaper to operate it will usually be the primary car, with the secondary car only used for longer trips.

Well if you rent you can't really buy an electric vehicle, because where will you charge it?

This is the biggest issue for me. I would happily pay for any metered electricity to a parking spot in my apartment complex, but the managers aren't interested. And my building was built in 2014!

If you live in California, in a multi-unit dwelling, they can't prevent you from installing your own charging port (which could be as simple as a standard 120V). The bill is AB 2565. You do need to carry an umbrella insurance policy, and come up with all the plans:

http://www.natlawreview.com/article/california-update-new-la...

And you can charge a lot in 12 hours at 120v. A tesla can add 3-4 miles of range per hour of charging, so overnight, you get 3.5*12 = 42 miles added. Teslas can charge at higher power, but it's often not necessary. Other cars, like the leaf can charge similar or slightly larger range at that amount of power because they are generally lighter. 120v outlet and daily range use of less than 40 miles and you are set. In the winter, if you run a heater, you will of course use more power (gas cars get almost free heat because they are ICE).

So you need a spot to charge, at least a 120v outlet. The next limitation is quick recharge. If I want to drive somewhere at the range of my car (say 80 miles with a leaf or i3, or 250 miles with a model s), and then I want to do my business, quickly recharge and go back home right away, you need a faster recharge, like an hour. Chademo can do this for leafs, supercharger handles that for teslas but they are rarer. Tesla can use chademo with an extra cost adapter, but they can also use high power ac (80 amps 220v) and charge 60+ miles of range added per charging hour.

Some places offer charging in their attached parking. Some workplaces offer charging as well, so you can charge there during the day, and leave it unplugged at night. Neither one is commonly available (yet?) though.

EV driver who rents here, I charge at work, at a free station a mile from my house, or I run a heavy duty extension cable out to my car. My landlords are cool so YMMV but it's definitely doable depending on your setup.

> for only $60/month after rebates

How is that possible? Even if you got a 72-month loan that would only be $4,320 with the MSRP being 'From $25,120'.

I would love to hear from somebody that knows more, but I believe that the leasing company takes the $7500 federal tax credit, and the buyer takes the $2500 California tax credit. So on a, say, 3 year lease, that's $2,160 in lease payments, and $10,000 in tax credits, and if the residual value after three years is $13,000 or more, then the numbers mostly add up.

I tried to talk to the dealer about this when I leased a Fiat 500e, but as is typical with dealers they were all lies and untrustworthiness, so I have no clue of their financials. I never want to step foot in a dealership again, if possible...

I posted this elsewhere, but here goes...

California requires car companies to sell a certain number of EVs in order to sell other cars in the state.

I can't speak for CA but what you described is how it works in MA

One issue could be that you need somewhere to charge it. A lot of properties (particularly in the UK) don't have off-street parking and you need to park on the road. So even if you own the building you can't install a useful charging point.

However, there's a Tesla Model S and a couple of Nissan Leaf EVs parked on a road near me and they must be getting charged somewhere. Perhaps at work?

Thinking about this a bit more, there's an interesting startup opportunity in matching the supply and demand of charging points. Some sort of sharing economy marketplace for renting out your parking spot that has an EV charging point.

How about a subscription charge delivery service? A Chevy Spark on a fast charger reaches 80% in about 20 minutes. A Nissan Leaf is about half an hour.

You subscribe and the service sends a truck every night with a fast charger powered by a big battery bank to your street and charges your car for you while you sleep.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com