Battery Electric Vehicles: Travel Characteristics of Early Adopters
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. How Are EVs Used?
2.2. Who Drives EVs?
3. Data and Variable Selection
3.1. Vehicle and Charging Station Data
- A total of 33 households whose only vehicles are BEVs (“BEV only households”);
- A total of 361 households who have at least one BEV and one ICEV (“BEV+ households”);
- A total of 123,053 households that only have non-BE vehicles (“Non-BEV households”).
- A total of 23 households whose only vehicles are BEVs (“BEV only households”);
- A total of 220 households who have at least one BEV and one ICEV (“BEV+ households”);
- A total of 24,686 households who only have non-BE vehicles (“Non-BEV households”).
3.2. Individual and Household Data
3.3. Travel Data
3.4. Final Dataset
4. Methods
5. Results
5.1. Logistic Regression Results Examining BEV+ Households
5.2. PSM Results
5.2.1. Analysis of Annual Mileage
5.2.2. Comparing Travel between BEV and Non-BEV Households Using PSM
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Chakraborty, P.; Parker, R.; Hoque, T.; Cruz, J.; Du, L.; Wang, S.; Bhunia, S. Addressing the Range Anxiety of Battery Electric Vehicles with Charging En Route. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 5588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Doshi, S.S.; Metcalf, G.E. How Much Are Electric Vehicles Driven?: Depends on the EV; MIT Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2023. [Google Scholar]
- Jia, W.; Chen, T.D. Are Individuals’ Stated Preferences for Electric Vehicles (EVs) Consistent with Real-World EV Ownership Patterns? Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2021, 93, 102728. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bauer, G. The Impact of Battery Electric Vehicles on Vehicle Purchase and Driving Behavior in Norway. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2018, 58, 239–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davis, L.W. How Much Are Electric Vehicles Driven? Appl. Econ. Lett. 2019, 26, 1497–1502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, X.; Liu, C.; Jia, J. Ownership and Usage Analysis of Alternative Fuel Vehicles in the United States with the 2017 National Household Travel Survey Data. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- He, X.; Hu, Y. Optimal Mileage of Electric Vehicles Considering Range Anxiety and Charging Times. World Electr. Veh. J. 2023, 14, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Angrist, J.D.; Pischke, J.-S. Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist’s Companion; Princeton University Press; Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Kim, Y.; Steiner, P. Quasi-Experimental Designs for Causal Inference. Educ. Psychol. 2016, 51, 395–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Guo, S.; Fraser, M.W. Propensity Score Analysis: Statistical Methods and Applications, 2nd ed.; SAGE Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2014; Volume 11. [Google Scholar]
- U.S. Department of Energy. Maps and Data. Available online: https://afdc.energy.gov/data/ (accessed on 31 October 2022).
- Wee, S.; Coffman, M.; La Croix, S. Do Electric Vehicle Incentives Matter? Evidence from the 50 US States. Res. Policy 2018, 47, 1601–1610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kapustin, N.O.; Grushevenko, D.A. Long-Term Electric Vehicles Outlook and Their Potential Impact on Electric Grid. Energy Policy 2020, 137, 111103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jaros, B.; Hoffer, A. How Are Electric Vehicles Taxed in Your State? Available online: https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/state/electric-vehicles-ev-taxes-state/ (accessed on 5 March 2024).
- California Air Resources Board. Draft 2022 Progress Report: California’s Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act. 2022. Available online: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/2022-progress-report-californias-sustainable-communities-and-climate-protection (accessed on 14 May 2024).
- Washington State Department of Transportation. Vehicle Miles of Travel (VMT) Targets-Interim Report; Washington State Department of Transportation: Washington, DC, USA, 2022. [Google Scholar]
- Bellis, R. Minnesota and California Move toward Reducing VMT to Address Climate Change. Available online: https://ssti.us/2021/03/30/minnesota-and-california-move-toward-reducing-vmt-to-address-climate-change/?eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=3b59ae6d-28ed-4788-b94b-783797753bb3 (accessed on 14 May 2024).
- U.S. Department of Energy. Vehicle Registration Counts by State. Available online: https://www.energy.gov/eere/electricvehicles/find-electric-vehicle-models (accessed on 29 June 2020).
- Liao, F.; Molin, E.; Wee, B. Consumer Preferences for Electric Vehicles: A Literature Review. Transp. Rev. 2017, 37, 252–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Patil, P.; Kazemzadeh, K.; Bansal, P. Integration of Charging Behavior into Infrastructure Planning and Management of Electric Vehicles: A Systematic Review and Framework. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2023, 88, 104265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tal, G.; Raghavan, S.S.; Karanam, V.C.; Favetti, M.P.; Sutton, K.M.; Ogunmayin, J.M.; Lee, J.H.; Nitta, C.; Kurani, K.; Chakraborty, D.; et al. Advanced Plug-in Electric Vehicle Travel and Charging Behavior Final Report; UC Davis Plug-in Hybrid & Electric Vehicle Research Center: Davis, CA, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Weldon, P.; Morrissey, P.; Brady, J.; O’Mahony, M. An Investigation into Usage Patterns of Electric Vehicles in Ireland. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2016, 43, 207–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, J.; Dong, J.; Zhang, Q.; Liu, Z.; Wang, W. An Investigation of Battery Electric Vehicle Driving and Charging Behaviors Using Vehicle Usage Data Collected in Shanghai, China. Transp. Res. Rec. 2018, 2672, 20–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tal, G.; Chakraborty, D.; Jenn, A.; Lee, J.H.; Bunch, D. Factors Affecting Demand for Plug-in Charging Infrastructure: An Analysis of Plug-in Electric Vehicle Commuters; Institute of Transportation Studies: Davis, CA, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Yang, X.; Zhuge, C.; Shao, C.; Huang, Y.; Hayse Chiwing, G.; Tang, J.; Sun, M.; Wang, P.; Wang, S. Characterizing Mobility Patterns of Private Electric Vehicle Users with Trajectory Data. Appl. Energy 2022, 321, 119417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jensen, A.F.; Rasmussen, T.K.; Prato, C.G. A Route Choice Model for Capturing Driver Preferences When Driving Electric and Conventional Vehicles. Sustainability 2020, 12, 1149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brady, J.; O’Mahony, M. Development of a Driving Cycle to Evaluate the Energy Economy of Electric Vehicles in Urban Areas. Appl. Energy 2016, 177, 165–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cui, D.; Wang, Z.; Liu, P.; Wang, S.; Zhang, Z.; Dorrell, D.G.; Li, X. Battery Electric Vehicle Usage Pattern Analysis Driven by Massive Real-World Data. Energy 2022, 250, 123837. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gong, H.; Zou, Y.; Yang, Q.; Fan, J.; Sun, F.; Goehlich, D. Generation of a Driving Cycle for Battery Electric vehicles: A Case Study of Beijing. Energy 2018, 150, 901–912. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jensen, A.F.; Mabit, S.L. The Use of Electric Vehicles: A Case Study on Adding an Electric Car to a Household. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2017, 106, 89–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Langbroek, J.; Franklin, J.P.; Susilo, Y.O. A Stated Adaptation Instrument for Studying Travel Patterns after Electric Vehicle Adoption. Transp. Res. Procedia 2018, 32, 464–473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Axsen, J.; Goldberg, S.; Bailey, J. How Might Potential Future Plug-in Electric Vehicle Buyers Differ from Current “Pioneer” Owners? Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2016, 47, 357–370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hardman, S.; Tal, G. Exploring the Decision to Adopt a High-End Battery Electric Vehicle: Role of Financial and Nonfinancial Motivations. Transp. Res. Rec. 2016, 2572, 20–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, B.; Wu, W. Why People Want to Buy Electric Vehicle: An Empirical Study in First-Tier Cities of China. Energy Policy 2018, 112, 233–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Priessner, A.; Sposato, R.; Hampl, N. Predictors of Electric Vehicle Adoption: An Analysis of Potential Electric Vehicle Drivers in Austria. Energy Policy 2018, 122, 701–714. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sovacool, B.K.; Kester, J.; Noel, L.; Rubens, G.Z. The Demographics of Decarbonizing Transport: The Influence of Gender, Education, Occupation, Age, and Household Size on Electric Mobility Preferences in the Nordic Region. Glob. Environ. Change 2018, 52, 86–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- White, L.V.; Sintov, N.D. You Are What You Drive: Environmentalist and Social Innovator Symbolism Drives Electric Vehicle Adoption Intentions. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2017, 99, 94–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Farkas, Z.A.; Shin, H.; Lane, E.C.S. Environmental Attributes of Electric Vehicle Ownership and Commuting Behavior in Maryland: Public Policy and Equity. 2018, pp. 1–61. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Amirreza-Nickkar/publication/328040925_Environmental_Attributes_of_Electric_Vehicle_Ownership_and_Commuting_Behavior_in_Maryland_Public_Policy_and_Equity_Considerations/links/5bb43be245851574f7f737df/Environmental-Attributes-of-Electric-Vehicle-Ownership-and-Commuting-Behavior-in-Maryland-Public-Policy-and-Equity-Considerations.pdf (accessed on 14 May 2024).
- Tal, G.; Nicholas, M.; Woodjack, J.; Scrivano, D. Who Is Buying Electric Cars in California? Exploring Household and Vehicle Fleet Characteristics of New Plug-in Vehicle Owners; Institute of Transportation Studies: Davis, CA, USA, 2013; Volume 16. [Google Scholar]
- Tal, G.; Nicholas, M.A. Studying the PEV Market in California: Comparing the PEV, PHEV and Hybrid Markets. In Proceedings of the 2013 World Electric Vehicle Symposium and Exhibition, Barcelona, Spain, 17–20 November 2013; pp. 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kumar, R.R.; Alok, K. Adoption of Electric Vehicle: A Literature Review and Prospects for Sustainability. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 253, 119911. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Singh, V.; Singh, V.; Vaibhav, S. A Review and Simple Meta-Analysis of Factors Influencing Adoption of Electric Vehicles. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2020, 86, 102436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- 2017 NHTS Data User Guide (Revised April 23, 2019). Available online: https://nhts.ornl.gov/assets/2017/doc/NHTS2017_UsersGuide_04232019_1.pdf (accessed on 14 May 2024).
- Landis, J.D. Minority Travel Disparities and Residential Segregation: Evidence from the 2017 National Household Travel Survey. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2022, 112, 103455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, X.; Renne, J.L. Socioeconomics of Urban Travel in the U.S.: Evidence from the 2017 NHTS. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2023, 116, 103622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jenn, A.; Springel, K.; Gopal, A.R. Effectiveness of Electric Vehicle Incentives in the United States. Energy Policy 2018, 119, 349–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dimock, M. Defining Generations: Where Millennials End and Generation Z Begins. Pew Research Center. 2019. Available online: http://tony-silva.com/eslefl/miscstudent/downloadpagearticles/defgenerations-pew.pdf (accessed on 14 May 2024).
- Bauer, G.; Hsu, C.-W.; Lutsey, N. When Might Lower-Income Drivers Benefit from Electric Vehicles? Quantifying the Economic Equity Implications of Electric Vehicle Adoption. 2021. Available online: https://lindseyresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/NHTSA-2021-0053-1578-Exhibit-86-Bauer-et-al-2021.pdf (accessed on 14 May 2024).
- Hsu, C.-W.; Fingerman, K. Public Electric Vehicle Charger Access Disparities across Race and Income in California. Transp. Policy 2021, 100, 59–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Blumenberg, E.; Paul, J.; Pierce, G. Travel in the Digital Age: Vehicle Ownership and Technology-Facilitated Accessibility. Transp. Policy 2021, 103, 86–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hjorthol, R. Attitudes, Ownership and Use of Electric Vehicles—A Review of Literature; Institute of Transport Economics Norwegian Centre for Transport Research: Oslo, Norway, 2013; ISBN 978-82-480-1430-0. [Google Scholar]
- Dong, G.; Ma, J.; Wei, R.; Haycox, J. Electric Vehicle Charging Point Placement Optimisation by Exploiting Spatial Statistics and Maximal Coverage Location Models. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2019, 67, 77–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mukherjee, S.C.; Ryan, L. Factors Influencing Early Battery Electric Vehicle Adoption in Ireland. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2020, 118, 109504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- NHTS. Developing a Best Estimate of Annual Vehicle Mileage for 2017 NHTS Vehicles. Available online: https://nhts.ornl.gov/assets/2017BESTMILE_Documentation.pdf (accessed on 14 May 2024).
- Rosenbaum, P.R.; Rubin, D.B. The Central Role of the Propensity Score in Observational Studies for Causal Effects. Biometrika 1983, 70, 41–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rubin, D.B. Using Propensity Scores to Help Design Observational Studies: Application to the Tobacco Litigation. In Matched Sampling for Causal Effects; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2006; ISBN 978-0-521-67436-2. [Google Scholar]
- De la Cruz Viesca, M.; Chen, Z.; Ong, P.M.; Hamilton, D.; Darity, W.A., Jr. The Color of Wealth in Los Angeles; Federal Reserve Banck of San Francisco: San Francisco, CA, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Jakobsson, N.; Gnann, T.; Plötz, P.; Sprei, F.; Karlsson, S. Are Multi-Car Households Better Suited for Battery Electric Vehicles?—Driving Patterns and Economics in Sweden and Germany. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 2016, 65, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Karlsson, S. What Are the Value and Implications of Two-Car Households for the Electric Car? Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 2017, 81, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, S.; Zhang, G.; Wang, C.-Y. Challenges and Innovations of Lithium-Ion Battery Thermal Management Under Extreme Conditions: A Review. ASME J. Heat Mass Transf. 2023, 145, 080801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, X.-G.; Vishnugopi, B.S.; Mukherjee, P.P.; Wang, W.; Sun, F.; Wang, C.-Y. Advancements in Extreme Fast Charging to Foster Sustainable Electrification. One Earth 2022, 5, 216–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boushey, H. Full Charge: The Economics of Building a National EV Charging Network. Available online: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/blog/2023/12/11/full-charge-the-economics-of-building-a-national-ev-charging-network/ (accessed on 5 March 2024).
- Joint Office of Energy and Transportation. Private Sector Continues to Play Key Part in Accelerating Buildout of EV Charging Networks Joint Office of Energy and Transportation. Available online: https://driveelectric.gov/news/private-innvestment (accessed on 5 March 2024).
- Bond, K.; Butler-Sloss, S.; Walter, D.; Benham, H.; Klock-McCook, E.; Mullaney, D.; Numata, Y.; Speelman, L.; Stranger, C.; Topping, N. X-Change: Cars: The End of the ICE Age. RMI: Basalt, CO, USA, 2023; p. 1. Available online: https://rmi.org/insight/x-change-cars/ (accessed on 14 May 2024).
- Wang, C.-Y.; Liu, T.; Yang, X.-G.; Ge, S.; Stanley, N.V.; Rountree, E.S.; Leng, Y.; McCarthy, B.D. Fast Charging of Energy-Dense Lithium-Ion Batteries. Nature 2022, 611, 485–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Neaimeh, M.; Salisbury, S.D.; Hill, G.A.; Blythe, P.T.; Scoffield, D.R.; Francfort, J.E. Analysing the Usage and Evidencing the Importance of Fast Chargers for the Adoption of Battery Electric Vehicles. Energy Policy 2017, 108, 474–486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- ICAT. Initiative for Climate Action Transparency. Available online: https://climateactiontransparency.org/our-work/icat-toolbox/assessment-guides/transport-pricing/ (accessed on 14 May 2024).
- Litman, T. Are Vehicle Travel Reduction Targets Justified? Why and How to Reduce Excessive Automobile Travel; Victoria Transport Policy Institute: Victoria, BC, Canada, 2023; p. 37. [Google Scholar]
- California Air Resources Board. Advanced Clean Cars II. Available online: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/advanced-clean-cars-program/advanced-clean-cars-ii (accessed on 31 October 2022).
- U.S. EPA. Vehicle Emissions California Waivers and Authorizations. Available online: https://www.epa.gov/state-and-local-transportation/vehicle-emissions-california-waivers-and-authorizations#state (accessed on 14 May 2024).
- Ogunkunbi, G.A.; Al-Zibaree, H.K.Y.; Meszaros, F. Modeling and Evaluation of Market Incentives for Battery Electric Vehicles. Sustainability 2022, 14, 4234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Costa, C.M.; Barbosa, J.C.; Castro, H.; Gonçalves, R.; Lanceros-Méndez, S. Electric Vehicles: To What Extent Are Environmentally Friendly and Cost Effective?—Comparative Study by European Countries. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 151, 111548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Golab, A.; Zwickl-Bernhard, S.; Auer, H. Minimum-Cost Fast-Charging Infrastructure Planning for Electric Vehicles along the Austrian High-Level Road Network. Energies 2022, 15, 2147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shoman, W.; Karlsson, S.; Yeh, S. Benefits of an Electric Road System for Battery Electric Vehicles. World Electr. Veh. J. 2022, 13, 197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Narayana Gowda, S.; Nazaripouya, H.; Gadh, R. Congestion Relief Services by Vehicle-to-Grid Enabled Electric Vehicles Considering Battery Degradation. Sustainability 2023, 15, 16733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Krishna, G. Understanding and Identifying Barriers to Electric Vehicle Adoption through Thematic Analysis. Transp. Res. Interdiscip. Perspect. 2021, 10, 100364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alkhalisi, A.F. Creating a Qualitative Typology of Electric Vehicle Driving: EV Journey-Making Mapped in a Chronological Framework. Transp. Res. Part F Traffic Psychol. Behav. 2020, 69, 159–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wicki, M.; Brückmann, G.; Quoss, F.; Bernauer, T. What Do We Really Know about the Acceptance of Battery Electric Vehicles?—Turns out, Not Much. Transp. Rev. 2023, 43, 62–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Make (Model) | U.S. Number | CA Number |
---|---|---|
Chevrolet (Bolt, Spark) | 17 | 16 |
Fiat (500e) | 27 | 27 |
Ford (Focus) | 6 | 5 |
Honda (Clarity, Fit) | 3 | 2 |
Kia (Soul) | 5 | 3 |
Nissan/Datsun (Leaf) | 191 | 94 |
Smart (Fortwo) | 10 | 6 |
Tesla (Model X, Model S, Model 3, Roadster) | 128 | 80 |
Toyota (RAV4) | 5 | 4 |
Volkswagen (e-Golf) | 14 | 13 |
Total | 406 | 250 |
State | Number of BEV-Only Households | Number of BEV+ Households |
California | 23 | 212 |
Georgia | 2 | 35 |
New York | 1 | 17 |
Texas | 4 | 36 |
All other states (excluded from the final dataset) | 3 | 49 |
Total | 33 | 349 |
BEV-Only | BEV+ | Non-BEV | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
4 States | CA | 4 States | CA | 4 States | CA | |
Household generations | ||||||
Silent Generation | 0.133 | 0.130 | 0.080 | 0.080 | 0.213 | 0.231 |
Baby Boomer | 0.333 | 0.304 | 0.490 | 0.505 | 0.510 | 0.512 |
Generation X | 0.467 | 0.435 | 0.503 | 0.481 | 0.291 | 0.286 |
Generation Y | 0.133 | 0.174 | 0.223 | 0.231 | 0.237 | 0.232 |
Generation Z | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.087 | 0.090 | 0.041 | 0.040 |
Household structure | ||||||
1 adult, no children | 0.400 | 0.435 | 0.053 | 0.061 | 0.172 | 0.165 |
1 adult, children | 0.133 | 0.087 | 0.300 | 0.302 | 0.222 | 0.217 |
2+ adults, no children | 0.067 | 0.043 | 0.183 | 0.184 | 0.245 | 0.259 |
2+ adults, children | 0.133 | 0.174 | 0.430 | 0.420 | 0.199 | 0.188 |
1 retiree, no children | 0.200 | 0.261 | 0.017 | 0.019 | 0.127 | 0.139 |
2+ retirees, no children | 0.067 | 0.043 | 0.183 | 0.184 | 0.245 | 0.259 |
Household size (range: 1–12) | 1.700 | 1.696 | 2.850 | 2.802 | 2.188 | 2.168 |
Number of household workers (range: 0–7) | 1.033 | 0.957 | 1.523 | 1.547 | 1.041 | 1.012 |
Household race | ||||||
White | 0.667 | 0.609 | 0.790 | 0.741 | 0.825 | 0.802 |
African American/Black | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.017 | 0.014 | 0.065 | 0.028 |
Asian | 0.200 | 0.261 | 0.150 | 0.184 | 0.051 | 0.083 |
Other | 0.133 | 0.130 | 0.043 | 0.061 | 0.059 | 0.087 |
Hispanic | 0.133 | 0.087 | 0.043 | 0.052 | 0.094 | 0.105 |
Household annual income | ||||||
USD 0 to USD 24,999 | 0.100 | 0.130 | 0.023 | 0.009 | 0.156 | 0.146 |
USD 25,000 to USD 49,999 | 0.100 | 0.130 | 0.033 | 0.033 | 0.213 | 0.199 |
USD 50,000 to USD 74,999 | 0.033 | 0.043 | 0.060 | 0.057 | 0.179 | 0.170 |
USD 75,000 to USD 124,999 | 0.167 | 0.043 | 0.240 | 0.222 | 0.250 | 0.255 |
USD 125,000 and above | 0.600 | 0.652 | 0.643 | 0.679 | 0.202 | 0.230 |
Household education | ||||||
Less than a BS/BA | 0.300 | 0.304 | 0.067 | 0.071 | 0.396 | 0.376 |
Bachelor’s degree (BS/BA) | 0.167 | 0.217 | 0.237 | 0.236 | 0.273 | 0.278 |
Graduate or professional | 0.533 | 0.478 | 0.697 | 0.693 | 0.331 | 0.345 |
Homeownership | 0.800 | 0.783 | 0.910 | 0.910 | 0.765 | 0.726 |
Number of household drivers (range: 1–9) | 1.267 | 1.261 | 2.187 | 2.175 | 1.748 | 1.740 |
Number of household vehicles (1–12) | 1.200 | 1.174 | 2.797 | 2.844 | 2.037 | 2.086 |
Population density (#/mi2): | ||||||
0–99 | 0.067 | 0.043 | 0.050 | 0.057 | 0.125 | 0.109 |
100–499 | 0.067 | 0.087 | 0.107 | 0.104 | 0.149 | 0.098 |
500–999 | 0.033 | 0.043 | 0.060 | 0.042 | 0.077 | 0.056 |
1000–1999 | 0.033 | 0.043 | 0.130 | 0.080 | 0.122 | 0.093 |
2000–3999 | 0.133 | 0.087 | 0.213 | 0.175 | 0.194 | 0.164 |
4000–9999 | 0.500 | 0.478 | 0.357 | 0.425 | 0.261 | 0.350 |
10,000–24,999 | 0.100 | 0.130 | 0.077 | 0.108 | 0.058 | 0.112 |
≥25,000 | 0.067 | 0.087 | 0.007 | 0.009 | 0.013 | 0.018 |
Household lives in CA | 0.767 | 1.000 | 0.707 | 1.000 | 0.345 | 1.000 |
Household lives in GA | 0.067 | 0.000 | 0.117 | 0.000 | 0.112 | 0.000 |
Household lives in NY | 0.033 | 0.000 | 0.057 | 0.000 | 0.216 | 0.000 |
Household lives in TX | 0.133 | 0.000 | 0.120 | 0.000 | 0.327 | 0.000 |
Charging stations | ||||||
Number per 100 K persons (range: 2.65 to 17.72) | 10.581 | - - | 10.552 | - - | 6.562 | - - |
Public, within 1 mi of residence (range: 0–82) | - - | 4.739 | - - | 1.849 | - - | 1.520 |
N | 30 | 23 | 300 | 212 | 66,915 | 23,060 |
4 States: CA, GA, NY, TX | CA Only | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mean | SD | Min | Max | Mean | SD | Min | Max | |||
Weekdays | ||||||||||
BEV-only N4 = 23 NCA = 16 | Number of trips/day | 3.6 | 2.7 | 0.0 | 11.0 | 2.9 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 6.0 | |
Travel time (min) | 73.6 | 65.1 | 0.0 | 281.0 | 63.8 | 49.0 | 0.0 | 156.0 | ||
Trip distance (mi) | 33.2 | 34.0 | 0.0 | 117.2 | 30.1 | 31.8 | 0.0 | 97.9 | ||
BEV+ N4 = 218 NCA = 156 | Number of trips/day | 7.1 | 4.0 | 0.0 | 20.0 | 7.4 | 4.01 | 0.0 | 20.0 | |
Time (min) | 138.5 | 92.5 | 0.0 | 575.0 | 143.0 | 95.3 | 0.0 | 575.0 | ||
Trip distance (mi) | 57.7 | 47.9 | 0.0 | 269.9 | 60.5 | 51.2 | 0.0 | 269.9 | ||
Non-BEV N4 = 51,645 NCA = 16,496 | Number of trips/day | 5.1 | 3.8 | 0.0 | 37.0 | 4.9 | 3.8 | 0.0 | 35.0 | |
Travel time (min) | 101.3 | 95.4 | 0.0 | 1863.0 | 98.01 | 96.8 | 0.0 | 1327.0 | ||
Trip distance (mi) | 43.4 | 56.3 | 0.0 | 1240 | 41.1 | 55.8 | 0.0 | 898 | ||
Weekends | ||||||||||
BEV-only N4 = 7 NCA = 7 | Number of trips/day | 3.9 | 2.9 | 0.0 | 8 | 3.9 | 2.9 | 0.0 | 8.0 | |
Travel time (min) | 49.7 | 54.8 | 0.0 | 159 | 49.7 | 54.8 | 0.0 | 159.0 | ||
Trip distance (mi) | 19.5 | 25.5 | 0.0 | 72 | 19.5 | 25.5 | 0.0 | 71.9 | ||
BEV+ N4 = 82 NCA =56 | Number of trips/day | 4.7 | 3.1 | 0.0 | 14 | 4.2 | 2.9 | 0.0 | 12.0 | |
Time (min) | 92.7 | 84.3 | 0.0 | 540 | 88.1 | 94.3 | 0.0 | 540.0 | ||
Trip distance (mi) | 44.01 | 61.1 | 0.0 | 470 | 44.6 | 71.6 | 0.0 | 469.7 | ||
Non-BEV N4 = 15,270 NCA = 6564 | Number of trips/day | 3.9 | 3.2 | 0.0 | 27 | 3.7 | 3.2 | 0.0 | 27.0 | |
Travel time (min) | 77.8 | 88.6 | 0.0 | 1200 | 75.9 | 88.3 | 0.0 | 1093.0 | ||
Trip distance (mi) | 36.0 | 57.3 | 0.0 | 841 | 34.8 | 56.1 | 0.0 | 651.7 |
BEV-Only | BEV+ | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Multi-States | CA | Multi-States | CA | |
N = 32,558 | N = 23,079 | N = 36,851 | N = 23,268 | |
Generations in the household | ||||
Silent Generation | 0.095 * | 0.117 * | 0.616 | 0.578 * |
Baby Boomer | 0.138 † | 0.184 * | 0.904 | 0.94 |
Generation X | 0.547 | 0.593 | 1.091 | 1.009 |
Generation Y | 0.220 | 0.342 | 0.688 * | 0.759 |
Generation Z | - - | - - | 1.133 | 1.243 |
Household structure | ||||
1 adult, no children | 0.996 | - - | 0.238 ‡ | 0.603 |
1 adult, some children | 1.286 | - - | 0.438 | 0.818 |
2+ adults, some children | 1.296 | - - | 1.240 | 1.414 |
1 retired adult, no children | - - | - - | 0.094 † | 0.406 |
2+ adults, some children | - - | - - | 0.615 * | 0.700 |
1+ retired adult(s), no children | 5.284 | - - | - - | - - |
1 adult, possibly with children | - - | 0.299 | - - | - - |
2 adults, possibly with children | - - | 0.326 | - - | - - |
Household size | 0.850 | 1.013 | 0.933 | 0.929 |
Number of household workers | 2.736 † | 1.725 | 0.890 | 0.978 |
Household race | ||||
African American/Black | - - | - - | 0.568 | 0.836 |
Asian | - - | - - | 1.275 | 1.652 ‡ |
Others | - - | - - | 0.744 | 1.050 |
Non-White | 2.846 † | 2.852 † | - - | - - |
Hispanic | 1.979 | 0.796 | 0.475 * | 0.665 |
Household annual income | ||||
USD 25,000 to USD 49,999 | - - | - - | 0.500 | 1.923 |
USD 50,000 to USD 74,999 | - - | - - | 0.744 | 2.473 |
USD 75,000 to USD 124,999 | 4.080 * | 0.579 | 1.528 | 4.213 * |
USD 125,000 or more | 18.817 ‡ | 13.200 ‡ | 2.499 * | 9.025 ‡ |
Household education | ||||
Bachelor’s degree | 0.377 | 0.462 | 1.838 * | 2.202† |
Graduate or professional degree | 0.603 | 0.618 | 4.274 ‡ | 4.124 ‡ |
Homeownership | 1.628 | 2.375 * | 1.725 † | 1.982 ‡ |
Number of household drivers | 0.333 † | 0.349 * | 1.252 | 1.105 |
Number of household vehicles | 0.139 ‡ | 0.105 ‡ | 1.289 ‡ | 1.285 ‡ |
Population density (persons/mi2): | ||||
0–99 | - - | - - | 3.720 | 1.649 |
100–499 | - - | - - | 3.954 | 1.074 |
500–999 | - - | 0.459 | 5.233 * | 1.307 |
1000–1999 | 2.034 | 0.46 | 4.621 | 1.458 |
2000–3999 | 3.178 * | 0.925 | 4.643 | 1.825 * |
4000–9999 | 1.062 | 0.482 | 3.482 | 1.628 |
10,000–24,999 | - - | - - | 1.884 | 0.992 |
Household lives in Georgia (GA) | 2.184 | - - | 1.513 | - - |
Household lives in New York (NY) | - - | - - | 0.271 ‡ | - - |
Household lives in Texas (TX) | 0.668 | - - | 0.413 ‡ | - - |
Charging stations per 100 K persons | 1.115 ‡ | - - | 1.124 ‡ | - - |
Multi-States | CA Only | |
---|---|---|
Untrimmed sample | ||
BEV-only vs. non-BEV households | −1185.4 | −4004.4 * |
BEV+ vs. non-BEV households | 61.7 | −1023.1 |
Trimmed sample (removed top and bottom 1%) | ||
BEV-only vs. non-BEV households | −111.1 | −3011.5 * |
BEV+ vs. non-BEV households | −1070.8 | −1302.6 |
Weekday | Weekend | Weekday | Weekend | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Panel A: BEV-only vs. non-BEV households | CA, GA, TX | CA | ||
Daily number of trips | −0.03 | -- | −1.42 | -- |
Daily travel time (in minutes) | 7.6 | -- | −26.7 * | -- |
Daily travel distance (in miles) | 9.1 | -- | −7.4 | -- |
Panel B: BEV+ vs. non-BEV households | CA, GA, NY, TX | CA | ||
Daily number of trips | 0.62 * | 0.46 | 0.98 † | 0.36 |
Daily travel time (in minutes) | −15.5 | 19.6 | 8.3 | 14.3 |
Daily travel distance (in miles) | −9.1 * | 13.3 | 4.4 | 15.5 |
Multi-State Sample | California | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Trip Purpose | Number of Trips | Travel Time (min) | Travel Distance (mi) | Number of Trips | Travel Time (min) | Travel Distance (mi) |
Panel A: Weekday travel for BEV-only vs. non-BEV households | ||||||
Work | 0.3 * | 9.2 | 7.2 * | −0.1 | −0.9 | 4.0 |
School/daycare/religious | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.2 | 0.0 | −2.2 | −1.6 |
Medical/dental services | 0.1 | 1.8 ‡ | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 ‡ | 0.0 ‡ |
Shopping/errands | −0.5 ‡ | −7.0 † | −2.3 | −0.8 ‡ | −7.9 † | −2.8 † |
Social/recreational | 0.1 | −0.5 | −1.0 | 0.2 | −2.0 | −2.9 |
Transport someone | 0.1 | 3.4 * | 2.8 | 0.1 | 3.6 | 3.2 |
Meals | 0.0 | −1.8 | −1.8 | −0.1 | −7.2 | −4.0 † |
Panel B: Weekday travel for BEV+ vs. non-BEV households | ||||||
Work | 0.0 | −5.2 | −2.0 | 0.1 | 1.2 | 1.3 |
School/daycare/religious | 0.0 | 0.0 | −0.3 | 0.0 | −0.4 | −0.5 |
Medical/dental services | 0.0 | −0.2 | −0.5 | 0.0 | 0.7 | 0.2 |
Shopping/errands | 0.0 | −1.7 | −1.6 | 0.1 | −0.3 | −1.0 |
Social/recreational | 0.0 | −1.2 | −0.7 | 0.0 | −2.9 | −2.0 |
Transport someone | 0.2 | 0.7 | 0.6 | 0.3 † | 5.9 † | 3.2 ‡ |
Meals | 0.0 | −2.9 * | −1.8 * | 0.1 | −0.2 | −0.6 |
Panel C: Weekend travel for BEV+ vs. non-BEV households | ||||||
Work | 0.0 | −0.7 | −0.6 | −0.1 ‡ | −3.1 | −2.7 * |
School/daycare/religious | 0.2 * | 2.3 | 1.4 | 0.2 † | 2.8 † | 1.4 † |
Medical/dental services | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.1 |
Shopping/errands | 0.0 | −0.6 | 1.0 | −0.2 | −1.0 | 1.2 |
Social/recreational | 0.0 | 7.1 | 6.3 | 0.4 † | 10.5 | 10.9 |
Transport someone | 0.2 | 3.1 | 2.0 * | 0.1 | 1.0 | 0.4 |
Meals | −0.1 | −0.9 | −1.5 | 0.0 | 0.6 | 0.8 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Feng, Y.; Saphores, J.-D.; Nixon, H.; Ramirez Ibarra, M. Battery Electric Vehicles: Travel Characteristics of Early Adopters. Sustainability 2024, 16, 4263. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16104263
Feng Y, Saphores J-D, Nixon H, Ramirez Ibarra M. Battery Electric Vehicles: Travel Characteristics of Early Adopters. Sustainability. 2024; 16(10):4263. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16104263
Chicago/Turabian StyleFeng, Yunwen, Jean-Daniel Saphores, Hilary Nixon, and Monica Ramirez Ibarra. 2024. "Battery Electric Vehicles: Travel Characteristics of Early Adopters" Sustainability 16, no. 10: 4263. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16104263
APA StyleFeng, Y., Saphores, J.-D., Nixon, H., & Ramirez Ibarra, M. (2024). Battery Electric Vehicles: Travel Characteristics of Early Adopters. Sustainability, 16(10), 4263. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16104263