4.7 Article

How to accelerate the uptake of electric cars? Insights from a choice experiment

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION
卷 355, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131774

关键词

Electric vehicle; Mobility; Transportation; Policy; Consumer behaviour; Conjoint experiment

资金

  1. Energieforschung Stadt Zurich
  2. ETH Zurich ISTP Research Incubator Grant

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Battery electric vehicles (BEV) are crucial for decarbonising transportation, but their uptake is currently slow due to economic and technical obstacles. Disruptive measures like banning fossil-fuel cars and supply-side interventions could promote rapid technological innovation.
Battery electric vehicles (BEV) are widely regarded as crucial to decarbonising the transport sector and achieving the Paris Agreement goals. Yet, there is much political controversy over how to accelerate the uptake of BEVs, which is currently still rather slow in most countries. The most important controversy concerns the extent to which consumer-oriented policy measures, such as purchase price subsidies, tax breaks and subsidised charging infrastructure are needed. Based on a large-scale (n = 1 ' 021) choice experiment, we examined the relevance of a broad set of potential obstacles and drivers of BEV uptake from a consumer perspective. Obstacles include purchase price, energy costs, maintenance costs, warranty, and range. Potential policy measures for overcoming such obstacles include, e.g., free public transportation tickets and car exchanges, government subsidies, warranty periods, and charging infrastructure. Our main finding is that current key obstacles to BEV uptake are primarily economic and technical. It implies that disruptive measures such as banning fossil-fuel cars as well as supply-side policy interventions could help push the car industry into rapid technological innovation, and that economies of scale in BEV production may be more effective than governmental measures aimed at incentivising BEV uptake.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据