Advanced Vehicle Cost Analyses

Argonne analysis shows that manufacturing cost constitutes half of a vehicle's retail price.

Electric vehicles (EVs) and hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) offer higher fuel economy and lower emissions than conventional vehiclesl (CVs). Their potential for improving urban air quality, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and decreasing use of imported oil make them very attractive. However, both EVs and HEVs use complex components that are expensive at present. When produced in larger quantities, these components could become cost-competitive. An assessment of future high-volume production costs and development of cost estimation methodologies would provide the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) with the information necessary to identify areas of future research and tools for evaluating the effects of such research on the affordability of these vehicles.

Argonne's study involved a detailed analysis of the manufacturing and retail cost structures of CVs. Argonne identified various component groups used in CVs and classified them as those that will be common between CVs and EVs and between CVs and HEVs. The contribution to initial vehicle retail price by each component group was estimated. We then identified new components for EVs and HEVs, investigated their cost structures, and assessed the effects of automated high-volume production and future technological breakthroughs. Cost functions were developed for these components, and computerized cost estimation models were created to help provide quick evaluation of alternative scenarios. To estimate vehicle mass and component power ratings, we also developed a theoretical model and calibrated it to match known mass and power values from technical and trade magazines. The methodology contains the vehicle mass estimation and component-sizing algorithm.

Results

The EV cost analysis showed that the lowest initial cost is achieved when an original equipment manufacturer (OEM) uses an existing CV platform for an EV. The most likely energy storage device, a secondary battery, contributes substantially to initial and life-cycle costs. Present and projected batteries have limited energy storage capacity; consequently, an EV would have a limited driving range between recharging. Battery technologies need to be improved for EVs to become attractive. Some battery technologies show potential for a nearly 120-mile range. When produced in large volumes, these batteries could reduce the initial cost difference between CVs and EVs to as little as 20%.

The HEV cost analysis showed that the parallel configuration has distinct cost advantages over the series configuration. The recent advent of high-specific-power batteries has reduced mass, volume, and cost. A power-assist parallel HEV that does not have any all-electric range would have the lowest cost. A dual-mode parallel HEV that has an 18- to 20-mile all-electric range would cost a few thousand dollars more. The initial HEVs would not be cost-effective at present U.S. fuel prices and an average annual driving of 11,000 miles.

September 20, 2004