Search

This study solicited information directly from decision-makers in private businesses operating fleets of medium- and heavy-duty trucks in California via interviews and pre-interview questionnaires. Additional interviews were conducted with truck manufacturers, consultants and other businesses providing services to the freight industry including leasing and auction. All these data were collected in 2021 and 2022. Fleet decision-makers describe what determines when and why they acquire and retire trucks and how they use those determinants. The purpose is to better understand vehicle turnover in the trucking sector. Direct contact with fleet decision-makers was preceded by a review of relevant literatures. This review helped in the design of joint questionnaires and interview protocols. Results are presented as 1) a set of determinants (internal to each fleet, external, and linking internal to external), 2) a typology based on decision-making structure, adaptation, and complexity, 3) case studies of decision-making types, 4) generalizations across fleets, and 5) extension to fleet consideration of alternative fuel trucks. One overarching conclusion is drawn: fleet truck turnover behavior varies widely—our highest-level abstraction—the typology—results in more than 20 types among 90 fleets allowing that some types involve mixed types of structure, adaptation, and/or complexity. Few fleets’ decision-making conforms to the commonly assumed model of total cost of ownership; many more do not. This report describes the varied ways fleets acquire and retire trucks, extends this to understand how this variety is already affecting freight fleets’ consideration of alternative fuel trucks, and poses questions as to how understanding this variety aids in promotion of zero-emission trucks.

Plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs), including battery electric vehicles and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, are an important technology for decarbonizing transportation and reducing urban air pollution. A lack of public charging infrastructure is frequently cited as a primary barrier to continued, widespread PEV market growth. Public and private stakeholders are investing in public charging infrastructure, in part because they hope the presence of more infrastructure will encourage consumers to purchase PEVs. However, public charging infrastructure can only affect PEV sales if people—especially those who are not already PEV owners—see it, and by seeing it become more likely to consider purchasing a PEV. Researchers at UC Davis examined this relationship. They used data from a survey administered in the first quarter of 2021 of approximately 3,000 California car-owning residents, as well as data on PEV registrations and public charger locations. They modeled the relationships between multiple variables.

This research makes explicit and tests an implicit assumption in policies promoting public investment in plug-in electric vehicle (PEV) charging infrastructure: even people who are not already interested in PEVs see public PEV charging. Data from a survey representing all car-owning households in California are combined with per capita counts of public PEV charging locations and PEV registrations to estimate a structural equation model for two central variables: the extent to which participants have already considered acquiring a battery electric vehicle (BEV) or plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV), and whether and how many places people see PEV charging. The model controls for socio-economic and demographic measures as well as participants’ awareness, knowledge, and assessments of PEVs. The model also controls for the known spatial correlation between PEV registrations and public PEV charging locations. The conclusion is there is no evidence of a relationship between public charging location density and participants reporting they see PEV charging locations. Nor is there a relationship between public charging location density and PEV purchase consideration. The evidence indicates there is little reason to assume building more public PEV charging means more people will see that charging or that more people will consider purchasing a PEV. Rather, awareness, knowledge, and positive assessments of PEVs allow people to see PEV charging in their local environment. In short, interest in PEVs is a prerequisite to people seeing PEV charging. Concomitant investments to increase awareness of PEVs and engagement in a transition to them as well as in PEV charging infrastructure may be a more effective way to grow the PEV market.

The transition to electric vehicles (EVs) will rely, ultimately, on the participation of all vehicle buyers. While nearly equal numbers of new vehicles are purchased by men and women, to date EVs are being acquired by far more men than women. Prior analysis of data from California at the end of 2014 found no difference between women and men in prospective interest in EVs; similar percentages were interested in an EV being the next new vehicle for their household. Yet today—years after these results were reported—the gender disparity in EV sales and registrations persists.Researchers at the University of California, Davis examined whether the gender similarities in prospective interest in EVs witnessed in California extended to other states that, while generally supportive of California’s EV goals and signatories to many of California’s air quality standards had less supportive policy frameworks, fewer EV sales, and less EV charging infrastructure in 2014. The researchers re-analyzed the same late-2014 data from Oregon, Washington, and the Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM). This policy brief summarizes the findings from that research and provides policy implications.View the NCST Project Webpage

Advocates of electric, shared, and automated vehicles (e-SAVs) envision a future in which people no longer need to drive their privately owned, petroleum-fueled vehicles. Instead, for daily travel they rely on fleets of electric, automated vehicles that offer travel services, including the option to share, or “pool,” rides with strangers. The design, deployment, and operation of e-SAVs will require widespread willingness of users to share with strangers vehicles that are capable of fully automated driving. To achieve the environmental and societal goals of e-SAVs it is critical to first understand and address safety and security concerns of potential and actual users. Researchers at the University of California, Davis, reviewed the literature to understand potential users’ perceptions of safety and security risks posed by intertwined social and technical systems of e-SAVs and proposed a framework to advance research, policy, and system design. This policy brief summarizes the findings of that work and provides policy implications.View the NCST Project Webpage

The confluence of vehicle electrification, sharing and pooling, and automation alters petroleum-fueled, human-piloted, and privately-owned and operated vehicles for personal mobility in ways that raises such questions as, “Are such systems safe and secure?” and, “Who is being kept safe and secure from what (or whom)?” Answers are implied by filling in the “who” and “whom” of the second question: system, product, producer, road, and user. This white paper focuses on (actual and potential) users of systems of electrically-powered, shared, and automated vehicles (e-SAVs) as well as other road-users, e.g., pedestrians and cyclists. The role of user perceptions of safety and security are reviewed to create an initial framework to evaluate how they may affect who will initially use systems of e-SAVs for personal mobility and how safety and security will have to be addressed to foster sustained transitions. The paper will primarily be a resource for e-SAV user research, but will also inform system development, operation, and governance. This white paper offers an overarching framework grounded in the social theory of “risk society” and thus organizes past work that, typically, focuses on only one of the constituent technologies or on one dimension of safety or security, e.g., collision avoidance as a subset of road safety.View the NCST Project Webpage

Ambitious global goals to improve energy efficiency and reduce greenhouse gas emissions are motivating a shift to electric vehicles (EVs), which include battery-electric vehicles (BEVs), plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs), and fuel cell electric vehicles. In 2018, the governor of California called for five million EVs to be on California’s roads by 2030. The International Energy Agency projects a global increase in EVs from 2 million today to 280 million by 2040. Creating sustained market growth to meet such goals presents numerous challenges to all EV stakeholders, including governments, the automobile industry, electricity suppliers, non-governmental organizations, and consumers.This policy brief summarizes the latest in a series of recurring surveys of consumers regarding their awareness and consideration of EVs. Two surveys of the population of car-owning households in California were conducted in February and June of 2017; sample sizes were 1,681 and 1,706, respectively. Several survey questions have been repeated over multiple years in similar samples, allowing comparison to earlier results.View the NCST Project Webpage

This is the second of two reports gauging the extent to which car-owning households in California have considered purchasing plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, battery electric vehicles, and fuel cell electric vehicles collectively, zero emission vehicles. It seeks insights into how to promote greater consideration across an increased number and broader variety of households. The analysis is based on two on-line surveys of car-owning households in California. The first was conducted in February (n = 1,681) and June 2017 (n = 1,706). Analysis of the February 2017 data is presented in the companion State of the Market Report 1. Nothing in the results for the June data contradicts the general findings from February.New results from additional analysis of the role of biological sex/social gender is based on a recommendation in the first State of the market report. The lower likeliness that female respondents have considered zero emission vehicles is solely for fuel cell electric vehicles. There appear to be some slight differences in how some explanatory variables are correlated to consideration between males and females: for females, it matters more that they live in a household that has flexible vehicle assignments; for males, it matters more whether they claim familiarity with internal combustion engine vehicles and experience with zero emission vehicles. Still, these differences are marginal and do not contravene the overall finding that across all respondents—female and male—few have paid much attention to any kind of zero emission vehicle.Zero emission vehicle consideration is a multi-faceted concept and there are several ways in which it can be initiated: personal contact with zero emission vehicle drivers; making visible the signs of the transition, i.e., teaching people which vehicles they see on the road are zero emission vehicles, making visible not merely of specific charger locations but a growing charging network, and marketing the fact incentives exist to buy and use zero emission vehicles; and expanding the number and variety of opportunities to gain direct experience of zero emission vehicles. In doing so, consider differential possibilities to provide targeted messages at the majority of car-owning households who are not opposed to the idea of zero emission vehicles, but simply have paid them no attention.View the NCST Project Webpage

This is the second of two reports gauging the extent to which car-owning households in California have considered purchasing plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, battery electric vehicles, and fuel cell electric vehicles collectively, zero emission vehicles. It seeks insights into how to promote greater consideration across an increased number and broader variety of households. The analysis is based on two on-line surveys of car-owning households in California. The first was conducted in February (n = 1,681) and June 2017 (n = 1,706). Analysis of the February 2017 data is presented in the companion State of the Market Report 1. Nothing in the results for the June data contradicts the general findings from February.New results from additional analysis of the role of biological sex/social gender is based on a recommendation in the first State of the market report. The lower likeliness that female respondents have considered zero emission vehicles is solely for fuel cell electric vehicles. There appear to be some slight differences in how some explanatory variables are correlated to consideration between males and females: for females, it matters more that they live in a household that has flexible vehicle assignments; for males, it matters more whether they claim familiarity with internal combustion engine vehicles and experience with zero emission vehicles. Still, these differences are marginal and do not contravene the overall finding that across all respondents—female and male—few have paid much attention to any kind of zero emission vehicle.Zero emission vehicle consideration is a multi-faceted concept and there are several ways in which it can be initiated: personal contact with zero emission vehicle drivers; making visible the signs of the transition, i.e., teaching people which vehicles they see on the road are zero emission vehicles, making visible not merely of specific charger locations but a growing charging network, and marketing the fact incentives exist to buy and use zero emission vehicles; and expanding the number and variety of opportunities to gain direct experience of zero emission vehicles. In doing so, consider differential possibilities to provide targeted messages at the majority of car-owning households who are not opposed to the idea of zero emission vehicles, but simply have paid them no attention.View the NCST Project Webpage

This is the first of two reports that gauges the extent to which car-owning households in California have considered purchasing plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs), battery electric vehicles (BEVs), and fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEVs) (collectively, ZEVs). It explores which households have or have not considered ZEVs and, in those differences, seeks suggestions for how to promote greater consideration across an increased number and broader variety of households. The analysis is based on an on-line survey of car-owning households in California conducted in February 2017; the sample size was n = 1,681. The primary measure is the extent to which respondents have already considered a ZEV for their household: 4-of-5 car-owning households in California had given either no or nearly no consideration to ZEVs. Combined, less than 10 percent had given the highest two levels of consideration; active shopping or ownership. Other measures of awareness, name recognition, incentive knowledge, and driving experience were commensurately low. Relying on socio-economic and demographic variables to segment markets is unlikely to succeed. Variables describing respondents’ decision contexts and resources are important, especially whether respondents can reliably access electricity at a home parking location. General attitudes regarding air quality, the relative public health and environmental effects of electricity vs. gasoline, and experience with HEVs add further explanatory power.Ultimately though, variables specific to ZEVs are more strongly associated with ZEV consideration: interest in ZEV technology; familiarity with ZEVs including name recognition, driving experience, and recognizing and recalling PEV charging, assessments of ZEV charging/fueling duration, driving range, purchase price, safety and reliability; and, whether people know a ZEV owner. The modeling done here is of differences between people at one point in time not of changes to people over time. Still, the suggestion is that to increase ZEV market growth it is essential to increase peoples’ awareness and knowledge, providing them with the basis for informed assessments, and thus prompt serious consideration of ZEVs for their households. It should not be expected that all the people who have so far paid no or little attention will be quickly converted to ZEV shoppers and owners. However, there seems little prospect to grow the ZEV market unless the vast majority of car-owning households in California can be engaged in the transition to electric-drive.View the NCST Project Webpage

Early sales and leases of plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs) appear to be skewed towards men. Data from California’s Clean Vehicle Rebate Project and reports from auto industry observers indicate the ratios of male-to-female buyers of PEVs were in the range of four-to-one to nearly six-to-one during the period 2011 to 2014. This is alarming given the ratio of male-to-female buyers for the full vehicle market is about one-to-one and deviations usually favor more women than men.A skew toward men in the early PEV market should not be dismissed merely as “boys and their toys” motivated to purchase PEVs because of interest in new technology (even if, as this study supports, men are more likely than women to express an interest in PEV technology). Research on early PEV owners indicates that for their many similarities, females and males talked about their PEVs in ways that suggest female PEV drivers’ experiences may carry less influence to shape the future of PEVs and charging infrastructure than males’ experience. If future PEV performance and charging infrastructure deployment are guided by early buyers’ feedback, male-dominated feedback will shape a system to which women will have to adapt. Unless attention is paid to understanding how sex identity and gender roles affect both supply and demand for PEVs, there is a continued risk of limiting PEV market growth.View the NCST Project Webpage

Evidence from the early market for plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs) indicates fewer were being purchased (or leased) by women than would be expected based on women’s participation in all new vehicle transactions. The ratio of male-to-female applicants for California’s Clean Vehicle Rebate (CVR) averaged approximately three males for every female from early 2011 to mid-2015; the ratio for all new vehicle transactions is approximately one-to-one. Research on early PEV owners indicated that for their many similarities, females and males talked about their PEVs in ways that suggest female PEV drivers’ experiences may carry less influence to shape the future of PEVs and charging infrastructure than males’. First, there were simply fewer female PEV owners to provide feedback. Second, females were more likely than males to talk about how they adapted to the present capabilities of PEVs while male respondents were more likely to talk about PEVs in terms of testing their limits. For example, female PEV drivers were more likely to talk about how they used the available charging infrastructure; male respondents were more likely to point to where and how to extend infrastructure. This study extends the analysis from early PEV buyers to the population of new-car buyers (of whom the vast majority own gasoline powered internal combustion engine and hybrid electric vehicles (ICEVs and HEVs)) in California. The results presented here are based on data from an on-line survey of new-car buyers in California conducted at the end of 2014 and subsequent inhome interviews with a subset of survey respondents in early 2015. The overall conclusion is that among new-car buyers, female and male respondents share similar distributions of interest in the next new vehicle for their household being a PEV or fuel cell electric vehicle (FCEV). For no electric-drive vehicle type did the male-to-female ratio approach that seen in the actual early market for PEVs. Under conditions that most closely correspond to the availability of incentives at the time of the survey, 22% of males and 21% of females express an interest in a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) (a ratio of 1.05 males for every female) and 12% of males and 10% of females express an interest in a battery electric vehicle (BEV) (ratio of 1.20). The difference is greater for FCEVs for which the ratio is 1.76 males for every female.View the NCST Project Webpage

New car buyers’ awareness, knowledge, experience, consideration, and valuation of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs), battery electric vehicles (BEVs), and fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEVs) as well as respondents’ attitudes toward the public policy goals of vehicles were assessed via an on-line survey and in-person interviews with a subset of the survey respondents. Questions about awareness, knowledge, experience, and consideration were asked prior to the valuation measure—the drivetrain type of a plausible next new vehicle designed by each respondent. The survey was administered in California, Oregon, Washington, Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Massachusetts, and the other member states of the Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM). Interviews were conducted in California, Oregon, and Washington. This report focuses on the results for California, though these are compared to results from other states. Even in California, prior awareness, knowledge, experience, and consideration of PHEVs, BEVs, and FCEVs were low. Still, 38% of CA respondents—representing nearly 1.5 million new car-buying households—designed a PHEV (21%), BEV (11%), or FCEV (6%) in a “design world” that does not allow battery-powered all-electric drive in full-size vehicles but does offer incentives modeled on those available at the time of the survey. Respondent clusters are identified by motivations for or against designing a PHEV, BEV, or FCEV. The overarching conclusion is the first barrier to achieving emissions and energy goals of zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) is few new car-buying households in California have yet to ask themselves whether and how they value ZEVs.

The most commonly stated function of eco-driving has been increased on-road fuel economy. Other functions, such as emissions reductions and safety, have been substituted or conflated with fuel economy. There is no consensus on what behaviors constitute eco-driving: definitions differ by functions, forms, and contexts. To aid in systematizing eco-driving classifications, the authors propose a framework grounded in behavioral theory. Because definitions vary, so too do estimates of effects. Still, the literature presents a compelling case that drivers can increase their vehicles’ fuel economy compared to established vehicle ratings. Equally clear, there is much yet to be done to ensure that drivers capture and sustain these improvements. Most eco-driving interventions have focused on driving behaviors. They have largely been limited to training and feedback, with tentative conclusions that feedback is more effective. The behavioral framework suggested here highlights the need for intervention designs specific to the function, form, and context of eco-driving behaviors.View the NCST Project Webpage

Plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs) are now being offered for sale to consumers. Contemporaneously, multi-way social interactions among individuals, groups, businesses, governments, and other actors are increasingly facilitated by communication technologies: we take this to be “social media.” Can this confluence facilitate the formation of new interest-based communities among plug-in electric vehicle (PEV) buyers? How might this be important to promoting PEVs? This paper presents the results of 28 in-depth interviews with household PEV drivers in San Diego, California. These PEV drivers show wide variation in their descriptions of who they believe PEV drivers to be, conceptualizations of a PEV, uses of social media to engage other members of the community, and socially mediated and face-to-face interactions with other PEV drivers. Better understanding of the relationship between emerging PEV markets, social media and consumer-based communities will affect the ongoing management of transitions to electric-mobility.

This report summarizes findings of household interviews and focus groups conducted with plug-in electric vehicle (PEV) drivers on the effects of demand response management (DRM) strategies on the time of day of PEV charging. The research was conducted in the spring and fall of 2012 with PEV drivers in San Diego County, CA. The DRM strategies were of three basic types. First, electricity pricing included intentional and carefully designed time-of-use (TOU) price signals as part of a household PEV customer rate experiment by San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E), as well as uncontrolled implicit TOU signals resulting from differences between home and away-from-home prices of electricity. Home and away-from-home charging had independent price structures—including an initial period lasting several months during which much of the away-from-home charging was free. Second, technology, in this case timers onboard PEVs and in the electric vehicle service equipment (EVSE), i.e., the “chargers” were available to support PEV drivers adherence to a chosen time to start vehicle charging. Third was exhortation—often implicit or indirectly tied to PEVs—about the private and social benefits of shifting electricity demand to off-peak periods. It is not possible to entirely disentangle the effects of the individual DRM strategies. The aggregate effect is a widely told story by our respondents of their goal to maximize the amount of their PEV charging done during the “super off-peak” period from midnight to 5am. Given the qualitative research reported here, this stated behavior should be corroborated with quantitative measures of vehicle charging when they are reported at the end of SDG&E’s TOU rate experiment. Our PEV drivers reveal different comparative standards for whether any electricity price is perceived to be “high” or “low.” Their behavior, in aggregate, suggests the effect of TOU prices may be more like an off-on switch than the continuous change implied by the most common measure of such prices, i.e., own-price elasticity of electricity. This may be because TOU prices convey both a private price signal and a public exhortation to heed a social narrative about the susceptibility of the electrical grid to service interruption during periods of peak demand. PEV drivers with home photovoltaic systems are the most likely to say they charge their PEV at their convenience throughout the day—despite also being on a TOU rate—because of the mistaken belief that their PV system insulates the grid from their vehicle charging. A series of questions is posed about the generlizability and longevity of these findings, in particular as additional PEVs and PEV buyers enter the market.

As the markets for plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs) and the deployment of electricity infrastructure to charge them are in an initial, dynamic launch phase, there is an absence of stable data on PEV purchase and charging behavior. How then are social, economic, and environmental effects of PEVs being estimated? How are plans for PEV and electric vehicle service equipment (EVSE) production made? How are the effective means to manage that behavior anticipated? In the absence of data, analysts make assumptions. These are often simple assumptions, or perhaps simplifying assumptions. In this chapter we compare PEV charging assumptions to real world measures and assess the implications of changing these assumptions for analysis, markets and policy.

Energy feedback to drivers is one method to engage drivers in energy saving driving styles. In contrast to the occasional broadcasting of general driving tips, in-vehicle energy feedback gives drivers access to accurate information about their specific driving situation on an ongoing basis. The increasing prevalence of such feedback in new vehicles suggests a belief that ongoing, in-vehicle feedback is better. However, there is little reliable evidence of the effectiveness of energy feedback in real-word driving in passenger vehicles. This study begins to fill this gap. Participants are given a commercially available fuel consumption display and recording device to use in their personal vehicle for two months. For the first month the display is blank as the device records a baseline of driving and fuel consumption. For the second month the display is switched on to show drivers one of three feedback designs. This paper presents preliminary results (N=36) of a larger study that will include 150 drivers along the California-Nevada Interstate-80 corridor. Using a mixed-effects linear model, an average decrease of 13 between 2% and 8% in fuel consumption (gallons/100 miles) between the without- and with-feedback months, depending on the feedback designs, is found. Categorizing trips into types based on distance and multiple speed characteristics, there are differences in the apparent effectiveness of feedback across trip types. Most trips average approximately 5% reduction in fuel consumption. The long distance highway trip type showed only a 1% decrease in fuel consumption between the two study periods.

Ecodriving, defined here as the adoption of energy efficient driving styles and practices (primarily moderating acceleration, top speed, increased coasting, and improved maintenance practices), has long been recognized as a potential source of reductions in transportation energy use. Estimates of energy savings attributed to ecodriving range widely, from less than 5% to as high as 20% depending on the driving and experimental context. To explore the effects on ecodriving of interaction between drivers and in-vehicle energy feedback, a customized, interactive energy feedback interface was deployed in a field test with real-world drivers. This paper presents the results of interviews with 46 Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle (PHEV) drivers who were given the ecodriving feedback interface for a multi-week trial including an interface off (baseline) and on (treatment) condition. This paper relies specifically on self-reports of driver motivations and behaviors to better understand what types of information motivated new ecodriving behavior; a future paper will investigate quantitative fuel consumption effects. Driver interviews at the conclusion of the study revealed that the introduction of feedback led three fourths of drivers to change driving styles to maximize on-road efficiency, at least in the short term. In addition, this study finds that the context of the feedback information, provided by a built-in goal or other contextualizing information such as a comparison value, is important for both comprehension and motivation. Personalization of the information allowed different drivers to access pertinent information, increasing the motivational value of the information. Instantaneous performance feedback such as real-time energy economy or power is used primarily for experimentation and learning of new ecodriving behaviors, whereas average performance feedback is used primarily for goal-setting and goal achievement. In addition, the direct comparison of personalized driver goals and average performance created a game-like experience that encouraged high achievement. Finally, the driver interviews revealed that feedback frames driving as a time to act in an efficient manner.

This paper presents results from a year-long study on driver feedback, driver attitudes, and the adoption of ecodriving behaviors. Narrowly defined, ecodriving represents only the set of behaviors that a driver can use to minimize the energy use of a trip after the trip has begun. The general ecodriving behaviors are moderating acceleration, top speed, and braking. Ecodriving has long been recognized as a potential source of reductions in transportation energy use, with reduction estimates ranging widely from less than 5% to over 20% depending on context. In-vehicle feedback is one way to motivate ecodriving by connecting drivers with salient information suited to their personal goals. Although many studies have tested unique feedback designs, little research has been conducted into the cognitive precursors to driver behavior change that may underlie the adoption or rejection of ecodriving practices, and therefore underlie the effectiveness of any feedback design. This study examines both precursor cognitive factors and driver behavior changes with the introduction of energy feedback, using a framework hypothesizing that attitudes, social norms, perceived control, and goals influence behavior and behavior change. The study finds that the introduction of a feedback interface can both activate these cognitive factors and result in behavior change. Furthermore, the study finds that there was an overall 4.4% reduction in fuel consumption due entirely to one group that showed increases in their knowledge of fuel economy and reported high levels of technical proficiency during the experiment. The second group made no improvement and may have been confused by the feedback. In addition, statistically significant relationships are found in the effective group between the magnitude of cognitive change and the magnitude of behavior change – supporting the theoretical framework. Finally, the baseline (prefeedback) performance of the drivers was an important model factor, indicating that drivers that already use highly efficient styles do not benefit much from feedback.

Understanding consumer purchase behavior will facilitate the successful deployment of new vehicle technologies that offer societal benefits—such as plug-in hybrid vehicle (PHEVs). To move beyond the rational actor model and similarly simplified behavioral approaches, this paper proposes an integrative, theoretically rich alternative: reflexive layers of influence (RLI). RLI is a framework that accounts for the role of social influence in an actor’s (or car buyer’s) development of pro-societal values and purchase behavior. Informed by a multidisciplinary literature review and empirical observation, RLI represents three layers that underlie the actor’s behavior; social influence is characterized by different processes at each layer. The bottom layer is the actor’s functional awareness of the vehicle, which can be influenced by the diffusion of simple information—such as the vehicle’s existence and basic purpose—from other actors or information sources. Next is the actor’s assessment of the vehicle based on perceived private and societal benefits. Assessment can be socially influenced through processes of translation, where the actor forms interpretations based on self-concept and group membership, and negotiates these interpretations through social interactions. The third layer is the actor’s self-concept—and associated values and lifestyle practices. Through reflexivity, self-concept can serve to frame the actor’s assessment, and can also be reinforced or altered according to their assessment, behavior, social interactions and perceived lifestyle practices of other actors. This paper applies the RLI framework to participants in a PHEV demonstration project as well as policy considerations.

Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) can be powered by gasoline, grid electricity, or both. To explore potential PHEV energy impacts, a three-part survey instrument collected data from new vehicle buyers in California. We combine the available information to estimate the electricity and gasoline use under three recharging scenarios. Results suggest that the use of PHEV vehicles could halve gasoline use relative to conventional vehicles. Using three scenarios to represent plausible conditions on PHEV drivers’ recharge patterns (immediate and unconstrained, universal workplace access, and off-peak only), tradeoffs are described between the magnitude and timing of PHEV electricity use. PHEV electricity use could be increased through policies supporting non-home recharge opportunities, but this increase occurs during daytime hours and could contribute to peak electricity demand. Deferring all recharging to off-peak hours could eliminate all additions to daytime electricity demand from PHEVs, although less electricity is used and less gasoline displaced.

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?’’

Estimating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of plug-in hybrid vehicles (PHEVs) is challenging because PHEVs are powered by gasoline and grid electricity—in a variety of proportions across individual consumers. Previous GHG estimates emissions postulate consumer behavior and simplify interactions with the electricity grid. We construct PHEV emissions scenarios to address inherent relationships between vehicle design, driving and recharging behaviors, seasonal and time-of-day variation in GHG-intensity of electricity, and total GHG emissions. From a survey of 877 California new vehicle buyers we elicit driving patterns, time of day recharge access, and PHEV design interests. The elicited data differ substantially from those used in previous analyses—including substantial interest in PHEVs with no true all-electric driving. We construct electricity demand profiles scaled to one million PHEVs and input them into an hourly California electricity supply model to simulate GHG emissions scenarios. Compared to conventional vehicles, consumerdesigned PHEVs cut marginal (incremental) GHG emissions by more than one third in current California energy scenarios and by a quarter in future energy scenarios— -2- reductions similar to those simulated for all-electric PHEV designs. Across the emissions scenarios realization of long-term GHG reductions depends on reducing the carbon intensity of the grid.

Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs), which run on both electricity from the grid and gasoline, are touted as providing some of the societal and environmental benefits of electric vehicles for a large portion of motorists’ daily travel, while also acting as a transitional technology toward fully electric vehicles. To test analysts’ assumptions about how PHEV users will recharge their vehicles, the observed recharging behaviors of forty households that participated in a PHEV demonstration in Northern California are reported. Recharging behavior is summarized across all households’ last week of their four-week PHEV trial period with regards to the time-of-day, frequency of plugging-in, and electricity demand to recharge the vehicles. While the means of the frequency distribution of plug-in events among demonstration households is similar to prior recharging assumptions made by analysts, the distributions are not symmetrical about the mean and there exists a large variation in both the average number of times households plugged-in per day and the average energy per plug-in event. Further, there is no strong correspondence between the number of daily plug-in events and total daily electricity demand. The range of behaviors reported here support the contention that the success of PHEVs in meeting energy and emissions goals relies on PHEV users’ recharging and driving behavior as much or more as on PHEV designs.

Understanding consumption behavior will facilitate the successful deployment of new pro-societal products and behaviors. Interpersonal influence is thought to play an important role in the successive adoption of pro-societal products and behaviors within groups across time, but processes of influence are poorly understood. This paper begins by presenting a typology for new products according functional, symbolic and pro-societal attributes. Five perspectives on interpersonal influence and pro-societal consumption behavior are identified and summarized. Contagion focuses on the effect of functional information flowing among people or groups. Conformity focuses on individual thresholds and motivations to mimic others. Dissemination is the intentional diffusion of information by a core group of motivated individuals. Translation is the tendency for various social groups to negotiate interpretations and valuations of the technology. Finally, reflexivity is a theoretical framework that explains the motivations of individuals seeking to establish lifestyle practices consistent with their self concept in an uncertain modern world. Strengths and weaknesses of each perspective are discussed.

To explore the role of social interactions in individuals’ assessments of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs), this study analyzes over 190 social (interpersonal) interactions elicited in interviews with 31 individuals in eight different social networks centered on households in the Sacramento, California region. Results are framed within five theoretical perspectives on social influence: contagion, conformity, dissemination, translation, and reflexivity. Responses within networks centered on participants in a study of consumer response to plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) suggest that interpersonal interactions do shape consumers assessments of PHEVs, and likely electric-drive vehicles generally. Characterizing how social interactions influence vehicle assessments and adoption behaviors, contagion (including diffusion of innovations), conformity, and dissemination provide useful concepts, but translation and reflexivity better provide the language and theoretical depth required to integrate the various motives and perceptions observed. Through translation and reflexivity, preliminary analysis suggests that certain types of households and social network may be more amenable to developing new, pro-societal interpretations of vehicle technology—particularly those households that: i) are in a liminal state in their lifestyle practices, ii) already have a basic understanding of functional aspects of PHEV technology, and iii) find supportive pro-societal values within their social network. This exploratory, qualitative study demonstrates that social interactions are important and their study benefits from the development and use of behaviorally realistic theoretical frameworks to advance transportation and energy policies that rely on the widespread uptake of new technologies.

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 tradeoffs among power, energy, longevity, cost, and safety. However, we also show that part of this battery problem is the overly ambitious PHEV performance goals thought to be necessary to meet consumer priorities. 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?”

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 tradeoffs among power, energy, longevity, cost, and safety. However, we also show that part of this battery problem is the overly ambitious PHEV performance goals thought to be necessary to meet consumer priorities. 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?”

To explore the potential energy impacts of widespread PHEV use, an innovative, three-part survey instrument collected data from 877 new vehicle buyers in California. This analysis combines all the available information from each respondent—driving, recharge potential, and PHEV design priorities—to estimate the energy impacts of the respondents’ existing travel and understandings of PHEVs under a variety of recharging scenarios. Results suggest that the use of PHEV vehicles could halve gasoline use relative to conventional vehicles—the majority of this reduction being due to increases in charge sustaining (CS) fuel economy. Using three scenarios to represent potential boundary conditions on PHEV driver recharge patterns (unconstrained, universal workplace recharging, and off-peak only charging), we estimate tradeoffs between the magnitude and timing of PHEV electricity use. In the unconstrained “Plug and Play” recharge scenario, recharging peaks at 6:15 p.m., following a far more dispersed pattern throughout the earlier part of the day than anticipated by previous research. PHEV electricity use could be increased through policies increasing non-home recharge opportunities (e.g., the “Enhanced Workplace Access” scenario), but most of this increase occurs during daytime hours and could contribute to peak electricity demand (depending on a given region’s definition of “peak”). We also demonstrate how deferring all recharging to off-peak hours (8:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.) could eliminate all additions to daytime electricity demand from PHEVs. However, in such a scenario less electricity is used due to the elimination of daytime recharge opportunities and less gasoline is displaced. Overall, policy, technology, and energy providers may use this information to understand whether their plans, designs, and goals align with these present empirically informed understandings.

Will people recharge a vehicle that does not have to be recharged? This, and the degree to which plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) designs emphasize gasoline or electricity, are central to assessing the energy and environmental effects of PHEVs. Plug-in conversions of hybrid vehicles are being made available to (predominately new-car buying) households throughout the Sacramento region for four to six weeks each. The vehicles are instrumented to report travel and energy; households are interviewed and surveyed. Results from the first 34 households—all selected in part because they can recharge a vehicle at home—indicate that on average they will recharge a PHEV about once per day, but with wide variation across households. The PHEV designs created by these households emphasize increased fuel economy rather than all-electric operation—as did the designs of prior representative samples of new-car buyers (who had not driven PHEVs). This result may be due in part to 1) “anchoring” (respondents are driving a PHEV that does not practically allow all-electric operation), and 2) households not creating integrated assessments of gasoline and electricity use/cost from the in-vehicle and internet-based instrumentation. Over the PHEV trials, narratives are co-authored about the PHEVs and their place in the ongoing life-stories of the participants. The primary themes to emerge are changing driving behavior, recharging habits and etiquette, confusion about PHEVs and how they work, and the role of payback analyses and more intuitive assessments of whether PHEVs are “worth it.” Tracing social interactions by the participants about the PHEVs reveals that complex translation of ideas and information about PHEVs is occurring as the PHEV drivers, in particular, use their trial period to reflexively explore lifestyle and identity possibilities of these new vehicles.

Home refueling helped address the fuel availability issue for gasoline vehicles a century ago; it may still have important implications for alternative fuel vehicles today. The positive consumer response and lessons learned about home refueling for compressed natural gas vehicles, battery electric vehicles, and plug-in hybrid vehicles demonstrate its potential and warrant further research. This paper presents a historical review and comparison of home refueling methods for a wide range of motor vehicles; the home refueling experience of these vehicles and consumer preferences and response to these methods are discussed as well. A description of neighborhood refueling is also provided. Furthermore, the important questions, challenges, and opportunities of adopting a home and neighborhood refueling strategy for alternative fuel pathways are summarized. The paper intends to help us understand the potential of home and neighborhood refueling and the difference between home refueling for different alternative fuel pathways, and help facilitate further exploring of the implications.

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 tradeoffs among power, energy, longevity, cost, and safety. However, we also show that part of this battery problem is the overly ambitious PHEV performance goals thought to be necessary to meet consumer priorities. 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?”

This report examines early users’ experiences with plug-in hybrid vehicles (PHEVs). At the time this study was conducted in winter and spring of 2007, PHEVs were not yet commercialized. Still, Americans were becoming aware of PHEVs and 25 to 30 vehicles converted from hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) to PHEVs were on the road. In interviews with 23 drivers of these vehicles we explored how they used and recharged their vehicles. We also discussed their recommendations for future PHEV designs, and investigated how they think about PHEVs, including the benefits and drawbacks they perceive. While today’s PHEV drivers may not represent either mainstream American car buyers now or future buyers of PHEVs, their behavior and viewpoints offer clues about how PHEVs will be received and used by other consumers and may shape both the PHEV technologies offered in the future and the reasons why future consumers value PHEVs.

Vehicles that can run on both electricity and gasoline—so-called plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs)—are proposed as both a near-term technology to achieve energy and environmental goals and a transitional step toward viable all-electric vehicles addressing many of the same goals. Whether PHEVs meet any of their goals depends not only on their design and performance on standardized drive cycles, but also on drivers’ travel and refueling/recharging behaviors. To replace assumptions with observations of potential PHEV drivers’ behavior in market and impact analyses, we conducted an internet-based survey of 2,373 new car-buying households in the United States. The instrument was implemented in three separate pieces, requiring multiple days for households to answer questions, conduct a review of their own driving and parking patterns, and then complete a sequence of PHEV design exercises. In this paper, we draw five conclusions from the resulting data. First, most new vehicle buyers are unaware of PHEVs in particular and are confused about electric-drive terminology commonly used by experts. Second, at least half of our target population is already equipped for at-home vehicle recharging, but currently have little opportunity for recharging at their workplace or other locations. Third, we observed widely varied interests in four possible PHEV attributes—fuel economy in both charge-depleting (CD) and charge sustaining (CS) operation, blended vs. all-electric operation, the distance over which the vehicle is in CD mode, and recharging speed. Still, the appeal of increased fuel economy appears to be highest and that of faster recharging to be lowest. Further, there is little interest in all-electric operation. Fourth, given the previous two points, we estimate that about a third of the target population has both the infrastructure to recharge a PHEV and interest in a vehicle with plug-in capabilities. Fifth, our recharge scenarios demonstrate that although widespread PHEV use could halve gasoline use, impacts to the electricity grid could highly depend on the time-of-day and location recharge management strategy. While unconstrained recharging among PHEV buyers may exacerbate current peak electricity demand, pushing vehicle recharging to off-peak hours through charging controls, time of day tariffs or other means could reduce overall electricity used by vehicles. Overall, policy, technology, and energy providers may use this information to understand whether their plans, designs, and goals align with these present understandings, or whether it would be collectively beneficial to foster new understandings of PHEVs among U.S. carbuyers.

This report discusses the development of advanced batteries for plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) applications. We discuss the basic design concepts of PHEVs, compare three sets of influential technical goals, and explain the inherent trade-offs in PHEV battery design. We then discuss the current state of several battery chemistries, including nickel-metal hydride (NiMH) and lithium-ion (Li-Ion), comparing their abilities to meet PHEV goals, and potential trajectories for further improvement. Four important conclusions are highlighted. First, PHEV battery “goals” vary according to differing assumptions of PHEV design, performance, use patterns and consumer demand. Second, battery development is constrained by inherent tradeoffs among five main battery attributes: power, energy, longevity, safety and cost. Third, Li-Ion battery designs are better suited to meet the demands of more aggressive PHEV goals than the NiMH batteries currently used for HEVs. Fourth, the flexible nature of Li-Ion technology, as well as concerns over safety, has prompted several alternate paths of continued technological development. Due to the differences among these development paths, the attributes of one type of Li-Ion battery cannot necessarily be generalized to other types. This paper is not intended to be a definitive analysis of technologies; instead, it is more of a primer for battery non-experts, providing the perspective and tools to help understand and critically review research on PHEV batteries.

When gasoline prices rise, it makes the news. Reporters mob gas stations to ask drivers how they are dealing with the higher prices. Many drivers say, “What can I do? I have to drive.” Some drivers declare they will curtail their driving while others complain of price gouging and oil company conspiracies. We know that few drivers adjust their driving behavior much in response to gasoline price changes on the scale that occurred during our study, but we do see that sales of smaller vehicles have increased, and that hybrids are getting lots of attention. But how do consumers really think about and respond to gasoline prices? Do they know how much they spend on gasoline over the course of a year, or do they think only in terms of price per gallon? When they buy a car, do they think about fuel costs over time, are they just looking for high miles per gallon (MPG)?

This study explores the symbolic meanings being created, appropriated, and communicated by the owners of hybrid electric vehicles. As symbolic meanings are shown to be important to hybrid electric vehicle purchase and use, understanding the meanings, as well as their construction and communication, is essential for policy makers and others hoping to promote these new types of vehicles. Hybrid electric vehicles embody combinations of meanings that were previously unavailable from automobiles. Market observers who fail to recognize this struggle to explain why some people buy hybrid electric vehicles. They may characterize buyers as naı ¨ve about calculating payback on fuel economy, or dismiss owners as image-seeking environmentalists. This research belies such simplistic explanations. Through the telling and analysis of buyers’ own stories, this study takes a robust approach to understanding the creation and spread of new symbolic meanings in the automotive market. Data were collected in ethnographic interviews with hybrid electric vehicle owners in the California, and analyzed using methods based on semiotic theory. In particular, the study explores how widely recognized social meanings (denotations) are connected to more personal meanings (connotations) and the effect that both types of meanings have on vehicle purchase and use.

Since car buyers have limited experience with fuel cell vehicles (FCVs), direct study of FCV adoption is not feasible. However, consumer behavior toward other types of electric-drive vehicles may offer clues about how the market for FCVs will develop. Research on owners of hybrid-electric vehicles (HEVs) indicates that consumers buy these vehicles partly because of the vehicles' symbolism. Any vehicle can serve as a symbol; it can represent meanings which relate to the identity of the vehicle’s owner. This qualitative research study examines early buyers of HEVs to understand the symbolic meanings they perceived in their vehicles and the role symbolism played in their HEV purchases. Findings are then prospectively applied to the future market for FCVs. The study includes four specific recommendations to increase the possibility that FCV buyers can access and communicate important symbolic meanings with their vehicles, thus increasing the likelihood of the FCV’s commercial success.

This research is designed to help researchers and policy makers ground their work in the reality of how US consumers are thinking and behaving with respect to automotive fuel economy. Our data are from semi-structured interviews with 57 households across nine lifestyle "sectors." We found no household that analyzed their fuel costs in a systematic way in their automobile or gasoline purchases. Almost none of these households track gasoline costs over time or consider them explicitly in household budgets. These households may know the cost of their last tank of gasoline and the unit price of gasoline on that day, but this accurate information is rapidly forgotten and replaced by typical information. One effect of this lack of knowledge and information is that when consumers buy a vehicle, they do not have the basic building blocks of knowledge assumed by the model of economically rational decision-making, and they make large errors estimating gasoline costs and savings over time.Moreover, we find that consumer value for fuel economy is not only about private cost savings. Fuel economy can be a symbolic value as well, for example among drivers who view resource conservation or thrift as important values to communicate. Consumers also assign non-monetary meaning to fuel prices, for example seeing rising prices as evidence of conspiracy. This research suggests that consumer responses to fuel economy technology and changes in fuel prices are more complex than economic assumptions suggest.The US Department of Energy and the Energy Foundation supported this research. The authors are solely responsible for the content and conclusions presented.

This study explores the symbolic meanings for hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) being appropriated and communicated by the vehicles’ owners. As symbolic meanings are shown to be important to HEV purchase and use, understanding both the meanings and the social processes in the construction of these meanings is essential for policy makers and others hoping to promote “green” vehicles. HEVs embody new combinations of meanings in the vehicle market. Many observers who fail to recognize this struggle to explain why some people want HEVs. They may characterize HEV buyers as naïve about calculating payback on fuel economy, or call HEVs “a badge of honor” or status symbol. This research breaks through such simplistic categorizations. Through the telling and analysis of HEV buyers’ own stories this research takes a robust approach to understanding the creation and spread of new meanings and development of markets. Household buyers of the first generation of HEVs told these stories in semi-structured home interviews. Their stories are analyzed by drawing upon semiotics to explore the formation and structure of meanings. In particular, the study explores how widely recognized social (denotative) meanings are connected to more personal (connotative) meanings.

Starting from the premise that new consumer value must drive hydrogen-fuel-cell-vehicle (H2FCV) commercialization, a group of opportunities collectively called “Mobile Electricity” is characterized. Mobile Electricity (Me-) redefines H2FCVs as innovative products able to import and export electricity across the traditional vehicle boundary. Such vehicles could provide home recharging and mobile power, for example for tools, mobile activities, emergencies, and electric-grid-support services. To characterize such opportunities, this study first integrates and extends previous analyses of H2FCVs, plugin hybrids, and vehicle-to-grid (V2G) power. It uses a new electric-drive-vehicle and vehicular-distributed-generation model to estimate zero-emission-power vs. zeroemission- driving tradeoffs, costs, and grid-support revenues for various electric-drive vehicle types and levels of infrastructure service.Next, the initial market potential for Me-enabled vehicles, such as H2FCVs and plug-in hybrids, is estimated by eliminating unlikely households from consideration for early adoption. 5.2 million of 33.9 million Californians in the 2000 Census live in households pre-adapted to Me-enabled vehicles, 3.9 million if natural gas is required for home refueling. The possible sales base represented by this population is discussed. Several differences in demographic and other characteristics between the target market and the driving-age population are highlighted, and two issues related to the design of H2FCVs and their supporting infrastructure are discussed: vehicle range and home hydrogen refueling. These findings argue for continued investigation of this and similar target segments—which represent more efficient research populations for subsequent study by product designers and other decision-makers wishing to understand the early market dynamics facing Me- innovations.Next, Me-H2FCV commercialization issues are raised from the perspectives of innovation, product development, and strategic marketing. Starting with today’s internalcombustion hybrids, this discussion suggests a way to move beyond the battery vs. fuelcell zero-sum game and towards the development of integrated plug-in/plug-out hybrid platforms. H2FCVs are described as one possible extension of this Me- product platform for the supply of clean, high-power, and profitable Me- services as the technologies and markets mature.Finally, the major findings of this study are summarized and directions for future work discussed. Together, the parts of this Mobile Electricity innovation assessment reveal an initially expensive and limited but compelling (and possibly necessary) set of opportunities to help drive H2FCV and other electric-drive-vehicle commercialization. Keywords: Hydrogen-fuel-cell vehicle, Mobile Electricity innovation, Plug-in hybrid, Plug-out hybrid, Vehicle-to-grid power, Vehicular distributed generation, Household market potential, product development, market development.

Motor vehicles are a core technology of our modern life and economy. But motor vehicles, motor fuels, and the road system unfortunately pollute our air, soil and water, depend on limited oil supplies and are implicated in warming the earth’s climate.In response, some car companies have introduced the biggest change in automotive technology since early in the last century. Hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) reduce emissions and fuel use through increased fuel economy. So far, full-HEV technology has been used to reduce automotive fuel use by up to 40% and reduce emissions to meet California’s (and thus, the nation’s) most stringent air quality standards. The following study measures such benefits.Americans are currently buying over 20,000 HEVs per month; one model, the Toyota Prius has reached sales volumes of over 100,000 units per year. However, total HEV sales are still small compared to annual sales of all vehicles and the total number of vehicles on the road. HEVs account for about 1.6% of the annual US market of 17 million new light-duty vehicles, and only 0.2% of the total US fleet of 230 million light-duty vehicles. The numbers of makes and models offered as HEVs are small, and sales are just getting started. To spread hybrid technologies across the entire market, and replace most vehicles on the road will take decades.Still, HEVs are making an impact beyond their incipient number, primarily by being the first “green” cars on the market and setting a standard of achievement for high fuel economy and low emissions. HEV sales and their halo effect on Toyota and Honda have spurred a contest between automobile makers to supply the latest high-tech, clean, and green technologies. In the California market, hybrids account for 3% of total new light duty vehicles sales, and hybrid sales growth outpaces that of conventional models (Automotive News Data). If this contest is noticed by more car and truck buyers, it may well transform the automotive market, accelerating the introduction of alternative fuels and other electric drive technologies such as plug-in HEVs and full electric vehicles to market.In the following sections, we review the problems motor vehicles cause, then describe the varieties of hybrid technologies. Then we analyze what difference HEVs are making right now and can make in the future for our air, water, security, and climate.

This report provides an introduction to semiotics: the study of symbols and symbol systems. In particular, the report focuses on the symbolic meaning of automobiles, and explores why this meaning is important to consumers. Section 1 defines what a symbol is, identifies the types of symbols, and discusses how consumer goods (such as automobiles) can serve as symbols. Section 2 investigates how individuals use the meaning in their automobiles to form and maintain their self-identities. Several theoretical approaches (including conspicuous consumption, self-congruity theory, and symbolic interactionism) are examined and contrasted with a more comprehensive approach, called products as self-creation, which is based on the theories of Anthony Giddens, Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi and Eugene Rochberg-Halton, and Grant McCracken. Section 3 explores how automobiles acquire their meaning, and how this meaning is transferred to the consumer. Finally, Section 4 examines how consumers evaluate the benefits from symbolic meaning relative to other types benefits vehicles provide, such as mobility. This report concludes that symbols matter in vehicle purchases, and that the adoption of new types of vehicles (including hybrid-electric and fuel-cell vehicles) depends partly on the symbolic value these vehicles deliver to buyers.

Presented at the National Hydrogen Association Annual Hydrogen Conference (NHA 2005), Washington, DC, March 29 - April 1, 2005The first step, in any program of self-improvement, is admitting you have a problem. My friends and colleagues, I would like to talk to you today about two big problems. We have a communication problem--communicating with our fellow citizens whose political, economic, and moral support we will need to achieve our transportation energy goals. We have an education problem--educating the professionals with the knowledge required to understand these goals and create the necessary technologies and strategies to achieve them.

Hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) have image, or symbolic benefits, in addition to their functionality. This study examines the images that ten HEV-owning households saw in their vehicles, and the impact symbolic benefits had on these consumers' decisions to purchase HEVs. In general, all of the HEV owners perceived some image in their vehicles, although these images varied in their strength and significance. The majority of households saw their HEVs projecting images that were linked to larger values, including social awareness, responsibility, and concern for others; others connected their HEVs to images of frugality and intelligent consumerism. HEVs served as communication mechanisms in all households, either by projecting their images or by stimulating owner evangelism. In addition, for a handful of participants, the symbolic benefits of their HEVs were significant enough to justify substantial functional compromises.

Much prior research into consumer automotive and fuel purchase behaviors and fuel economy has been shaped by the normative assumptions of economics. Among these assumptions are that consumers should pay attention to costs of fuel and that they are aware of their options to save on fuel over long periods of time, i.e., the life of a vehicle or at least their period of ownership. For example, researchers have analyzed in some depth consumer choices for more fuel economical vehicles in the 1980s and more recently consumer choices in Europe for more expensive diesel vehicles with lower fuel costs than their gasoline competitors. Some of this research investigates whether automobile buyers have varying future values for money invested today in higher fuel economy, i.e., consumers' discount rates. More recently, in the context of the political battle over new CAFE standards, both automobile manufacturers and energy researchers have asked consumers questions about their willingness to pay more for higher fuel economy and consumers' payback periods for these investments. Both payback periods and net present value calculations require good knowledge of one's own vehicle and annual fuel expenses, forecasts of future prices, and a sophisticated series of calculations. The new arena of debate and research on consumer response to better fuel economy technology is CO2 reduction strategies generally, and regulations to reduce CO2 emissions from transportation in California specifically.The research we report here is designed to help researchers and policy makers to ground future work in the reality of how consumers think and behave relative to fuel economy and efficiency, both on a daily basis and when they purchase motor vehicles. We recruited what we call an "illustrative" sample; fifty-seven households from ten "lifestyle sectors"—for example hybrid vehicle buyers, financial analysts, and off-road vehicle enthusiasts—that we guessed might have differing information and habits around the issue of fuel economy. We conducted a semi-structured, 2-hour interview, which included these four parts: household vehicle histories, purchase narratives, prospecting of future choices, and knowledge and daily behavior around fuel use and purchases.Our strongest finding was that for the most part, our households do not pay much attention to fuel cost over time or in their household budgets, unless they are severely constrained economically. Consumers do pay attention to the price of a tank of fuel and the unit price of fuel on the given day they buy fuel. But this "knowledge" is ephemeral; it is rapidly forgotten over the next few days. Fuel consumption instrumentation on most vehicles is limited and drivers seldom pay attention; the exception is hybrid vehicles and their drivers.One effect of limited knowledge is that when consumers buy a vehicle, they do not have the basic building blocks of knowledge to make an economically rational decision. When offered a choice to pay more for better fuel economy, most households were unable to estimate potential savings, particularly over periods of time greater than one month. In the absence of such calculations, many households were overly optimistic about potential fuel savings, wanting and thinking they could recover an investment of several thousand dollars in a couple of years.Of importance to regulators, we find that good fuel economy is widely considered an attribute of cheap cars; many of our households expressed greater regard for fuel efficiency, a term free from a cheap image and more closely associated to ideas of resource conservation, advanced engineering, and high technology and quality.In the last part of the report we identify five styles of decision making relative to fuel economy, including a more detailed discussion of the decision-making in a small sample of eight hybrid vehicle buyers.In closing, and as this is the first stage in a longer research project, we offer some preliminary conclusions and two hypotheses to steer more quantitative research. Our findings suggest that current strategies of drawing attention to annual fuel cost savings could disappoint buyers, and instead education efforts might focus on fuel efficiency and technical advances. Our interviewees ignore fuel economy for additional reasons; it is only one feature of an expensive, complex good which has many implications for lifestyle and image goals. Our research suggests that consumers might value fuel economy more highly if it were more like shiny paint or a bold body style—an attribute with some emotional punch.

Unavailable.