1 Introduction
Acronym | Term | Description |
---|---|---|
EV |
Electric Vehicle
| Any vehicle powered by an electric powertrain. |
PiEV |
Plug-in Electric Vehicle
| A vehicle with an electric powertrain which requires (at least in part) charging from an external source. |
BEV |
Battery Electric Vehicle
| A vehicle with an electric powertrain fully powered by an internal battery charged from an external source. |
PHEV |
Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle
| A vehicle with an electric powertrain which can be powered by either an internal battery charged from an external source or from an internal conventionally fuelled combustion engine. |
FCV |
Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle
| A vehicle with an electric powertrain powered by a hydrogen fuel cell. |
2 Previous research
3 Method
Policy and Regulation | Economic Conditions | Manufacturer Strategies |
---|---|---|
• Emission regulations • Purchase subsidies • Infrastructure subsidies | • GDP ratio • Oil price | • Learning rate • Marketing effort • R&D share |
4 Scenario overview
5 Scenario inputs
5.1 Policy and regulation
Scenario | Period | Purchase Subsidy (Cost differential from ICEV) | Infrastructure Subsidy (100%) |
---|---|---|---|
S1 (Base) | 2011–13 | 50% | Not available (N/A) |
2014–15 | 25% | ||
S2 | 2011–13 | 50% | N/A |
2014–25 | 25% | ||
S3 | 2011–13 | 50% | N/A |
2014–50 | 25% | ||
S4 | 2011–13 | 50% | 2015–50 |
2014–15 | 25% |
5.2 Economic conditions
5.3 Manufacturer strategies
Component | Learning Effect on Cost | Cumulative R&D spend to 2050 (€B) | |
---|---|---|---|
Base (1995) | Minimum (2050) | ||
Electric Drive System | 1 | 0.22 | 100 |
BEV Battery | 1 | 0.28 | 99 |
HEV Battery | 1 | 0.24 | 98 |
PHEV Battery | 1 | 0.27 | 99 |
IC Engine | 0.85 | 0.84 | 1488 |
Hydrogen Storage Tank | 1 | 0.54 | 90 |
Body Materials | 0.20 | 0.16 | 300 |
Fuel Cell System | 1 | 0.54 | 92 |
6 Results
6.1 Impacts on EV sales shares
6.1.1 BEV sales share
6.1.2 PHEV sales share
6.1.3 FCV sales share
6.2 Testing for the absence of FCVs
6.3 Testing for subsidy regimes
7 Limitations
8 Discussion and conclusion
-
Under maximised manufacturer strategy variables and the most favourable economic market condition scenarios, FCV benefits the most of the of the powertrains considered;
-
Manufacturer strategies are more crucial for FCV than for PiEV success;
-
Strong marketing when both BEV and FCV are introduced is important for the success of both powertrains;
-
A lower learning rate benefits BEV, as high learning rates benefit the competing FCV.
-
FCVs may not experience market success in the absence of fleet emission regulations or if PiEVs gain early success (for which economic conditions have a notable influence);
-
Differing subsidy regimes, for both purchase and infrastructure, resulted in marginal change in overall EV share, but impact individual EV shares;
-
PHEV is the least affected powertrain by either of the offered subsidies.
-
Manufacturers must pay close attention to GDP and oil price conditions despite any of the three strategies examined;
-
Greater policy focus is required on the market interaction between PiEVs and FCVs rather than only the competition between EVs and conventional vehicles;
-
Fleet emission targets are less important when GDP and oil price conditions are otherwise favourable towards e-mobility;
-
Long-term purchase subsidies are important when economic conditions and manufacturer strategies are unfavourable towards e-mobility;
-
If the policy goal is to promote FCVs, subsidising the deployment of hydrogen infrastructure has a greater leverage than purchase subsidies.