Economic cost of electric transport

The argument

Electric vehicles are expensive to purchase and maintain, making them a luxury item of the wealthy rather than something accessible to the average consumer — and because of that cost barrier, this argument holds, they will not become a widespread product. Mass adoption requires a vehicle the median household can buy, not merely a technology that works. The usual answer is that prices will keep falling, and the argument's central move is to deny that they can fall much further. Despite the decrease in the cost of making batteries, electric vehicles remain expensive, and it is unlikely the cost of making them will drop much more, because the natural resources used to make car batteries are limited. Manufacturing efficiencies can reduce what a producer adds to the raw materials, but they cannot reduce the cost of the materials themselves. Indeed the pressure runs the other way as adoption grows. As demand for raw materials increases, the price will also increase, because of high competition for a limited quantity — so the very success that would make electric vehicles mainstream raises the input costs that keep them expensive. If those prices increase, electric car prices will not continue to decrease, and the projected path to affordability closes. Ownership costs compound the purchase price. Electric vehicles require a large supply of electricity, specialised maintenance, and frequent tyre changes. The increased use of electricity would raise a consumer's utility bill, an ongoing expense that does not appear on the sticker, while car maintenance would require consumers to go to dealerships, which tend to charge higher rates than independent garages — a consequence of the specialisation the vehicles demand. Because of these economic costs, at purchase and throughout ownership, the argument concludes it is unlikely that electric vehicles will become the transportation norm.

Premises

Counter-arguments

The upfront cost of electric vehicles tends to be greater than that of traditional cars, but there are other factors that decrease the cost of owning an electric vehicle. Charging an electric vehicle can cost half as much as refueling a gas-run car, depending on the rates where one lives. Furthermore, electric cars require less engine maintenance than regular cars, meaning less money spent on things like oil changes.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] The premise predicts that costs cannot fall much further while its own first clause concedes that battery costs have already fallen substantially, and it offers no reason why the learning effects, chemistry changes and manufacturing scale behind that decline should stop. Raw-material prices are also cyclical, responding to new extraction and to recycling, so scarcity supports volatility rather than a floor under prices. [Rejecting P2] The running-cost claim is stated the wrong way round on the two largest items: electricity per mile is generally cheaper than fuel, and an electric drivetrain has far fewer serviceable parts than an internal combustion engine, with no oil changes. Purchase price is a real barrier, but it is a barrier to buying new, which a second-hand market erodes over time — so the premises support slower adoption rather than the conclusion that large-scale electric mobility will not occur.