Imagine you're on taxable income of £120k and have two chidlren in nursery. Currently you get no help with childcare costs from the government. From my own experience it's ~£6000 subsidy per child.
You can currently take out an EV salary sacrifice scheme for ~£600 per month (pre tax), and that brings your taxable income down by £7200. Put another £13k in pension. Boom, you're now getting £13k in pension p/a, and your car is effectively free, because you get £12k back in childcare subsidies.
It still might be desirable, but it isn't free.
Obviously if you don't need a new car, it's a really bad financial decision to buy one.
And even if you do, it might be a bad financial decision to buy one.
> total vehicle sales in March 2026 was 269,483 units
So BYD market share is 5.5% in Brazil.
1. Unlike the rest of the world, EVs were sold in the US as muscle cars for rich people (e.g. Tesla). Everywhere else they're cheap cars for urban commuters (e.g. BYD).
2. Republicans sabotaged every attempt from the Democrats to get EVs going on.
3. Space and demography: EVs do very well in small countries (e.g. Europe) or big countries with a concentrated population (e.g.Brasil, Nigeria). They do poorly in countries with big distances and a spread out population.
Certainly not in cars. The US car industry really more or less stopped even _trying_ to compete internationally in the 90s or so. The sole exception was Ford, but they went for an unusual approach where Ford Europe designed its own cars, using parts from Bosch etc. Ford Europe is now also all but dead in the consumer space, too. To a large extent the US car industry survives due to protectionism (notably this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_tax).
Because the US is the most backward advanced country socially/politically
Only Tesla designed cars to be electric from a clean sheet. And they were doing extremely well for a long time, and had an enormous lead. But they squandered it in a variety of ways.
The automakers and oil interests spent a lot of effort badmouthing electric cars. To hear Americans talk about it, they need to haul giant boats on their daily 400 mile commutes into uncharted forest. They didn't come up with "range anxiety"; it was deliberately spread.
For a while there was a partisan divide about it, with electric cars seen as a hippie-liberal choice, much as hybrids used to be. Then circa 2020 Elon Musk began to systematically alienate that market.
We never wanted their “electric cars” … we wanted their cars, but electric.
The road to electric - in charts and data - https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/electric-cars/choosing/road-to-e...
Electric car charging prices at public chargers - https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/electric-cars/charging/electric-...
Makes EVs quite appealing.
Now the experience is much improved.
Cars aren't just a pure cost benefit analysis.
Hence my perspective is different. To have everyone priced off the roads is going to make the cycling so much faster and pleasant.
I have considered getting an electric car in the past, but, one look at the traffic, and I decided against going that slow. So I thought about getting an electric bicycle, only to come to the same conclusion, a normal bicycle is all I want or need.
There is a similar story with food. No fertiliser? No problem! I only eat plants, with no processed food or dead animals. Soon the 'grow crops to fatten animals so fat people can eat them' idea will be too costly.
Of course, the world isn't going to stop eating animal corpses at every occasion or ween the adults off milk, so we will see what happens. Nonetheless, plants only is a good starting point.
I don't see electric cars as a solution except for boomers, particularly in the UK context, where the goal is to have 50% of urban journeys taken with active travel by 2030. Active travel means walking or cycling, and I am all for it.
If you are obese, car dependent and eating burgers, the situation is not good. However, if free from car dependency and able to cook from scratch with plants, then the situation is somewhat different, previously unpopular lifestyle choices make sense.
I also don't see what right I have to West Asian oil, it is not a birthright to have access to all the fuel one can afford. My view is that it is best left in the ground.
People use the mobility part of their PIP payments to lease a car from Motability which is an independent company, they could use the mobility payment to pay for taxi instead.
But the only reason it exists is because of government funds and government policy.
The scheme would collapse if the government stopped allowing benefit money to be used for Motability leases. The banks lent them money under the reassurance of the government funding.
But yes, they lease the vehicles, they don't sell them.
EDIT: my comment may have some minor inaccuracies. I just found https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmwo... - a very detailed description of the company, charities etc
It’s not independent, because it derives all of its income from the government and uses it to buy people brand new top of the range cars.
Electric cars registered in countries with large land mass?
"..Electric car adoption , ranked by value of government incentives.."?
Eventually I just searched for
"... graphs relating to EV adoption"
" ..Relationship between country land mass and ev adoption rate.." ?
The basic Seat Leon combi is currently 22.000€ on promotion. And that's a spacious family car. No EV car exist at that price point in that size with a range that most people would be comfortable with it.
Yes they will exist in the future but we are still a decade away from that at least.
The salesman aren't knowledgeable about them, they don't have ownership experience with them, and EV's generate dramatically fewer lifetime "service" visits and parts sales.
This was common with the f150 lightning, where salesman were pretty much "If you want it I can do the paper work, but let me show you the regular F150's we have here if you like to drive places without headaches."
And surprisingly to me it is even pretty damn efficient despite being originally designed as a gasoline-powered vehicle.
For example Hyundai Kona EV differs inside from the Kona ICE and hybrid models by having the shifter on the column instead of on the center console and the floor is flatter from not needing to accommodate the transmission tunnel.
A mix of Googling and LLMing suggests that BMW, Genesis, Mini Cooper, Volvo, and VW also have some EVs that are very similar to their non-EV cars.
It is interesting with the current oil shock what will happen to US automakers that have all but abandoned fuel efficient cars.
I own a Kia Rio hachback. It was incredibly cheap for the features and has been incredibly reliable. I just want an electric version of that with as much range as possible and a heat pump for cabin climate control and battery management.
But nope, can't have that, instead we have a market full of cars 4+ times the cost with a bunch of stupid, useless, asinine bells and whistles.
I assume they'll eventually sell that, in about 10 years time, which makes me sad.
B = Battery
H = Hybrid
PH = Plug-in hybrid (Same as a hybrid but you can charge up the hybrid battery at home)
And, in practice, the battery tends to be much, much bigger. Some PHEVs are basically mediocre-range electric cars which happen to have a petrol generator.
Surely that's the "same as a battery but you can use petrol on long journeys"
The only energy input for a "hybrid" is from petrol. It's slightly more efficient. A Toyota Yaris 1.5 hubrid gets about 65mpg rather than the 45mpg on a Skoda Kamiq
https://www.honestjohn.co.uk/realmpg/skoda/kamiq-2023
https://www.honestjohn.co.uk/realmpg/toyota/yaris-cross-2021
You can, but in practice most people don't. And I can understand why -- it's inconvenient to have to plug in after every short trip, and the short electric range of most PHEV's means you do have to plug in after every short trip.
I plug in my EV around once a week, and it's more convenient than going to the gas station, but I'm not sure I'd want to have to plug it in every time I come home from even a short trip to the supermarket.
You could easily turn those terms in the article into hyperlinks to definitions.
You could even have the links go to definitions hosted on your own website to boost page reads and ad counts if you really wanted to
ICE cars come with a variety of add-ons and schemes to improve efficiency: fuel injectors, ECUs, braking energy capture systems (aka hybrid), small batteries for short trips that no one plugs in (aka plug in hybrids), etc.
It seems to be a US thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partial_zero-emissions_vehicle
> In California, PZEVs have their own administrative category for low-emission vehicles. The category was made in a bargain between automakers and the California Air Resources Board (CARB), so that automobile makers could delay making mandated zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs)—battery electric and fuel-cell electric vehicles.
Mild Hybrid… pfffft.
In 2022 is was £1.89 a litre and spent most of the year over £1.60 a litre
Adjusted for inflation that would be most of the year at £1.85, and a high of £2.18 a litre
https://www.racfoundation.org/data/uk-pump-prices-over-time
From 2011 to 2014 petrol was about £1.30 a litre. Adjusted for inflation terms that's £1.80-£2 a litre -- far less than current "highs".
The average UK car does 8000 miles and about 45mpg (uk gallons), or about 10 miles per litre. It thus costs 800 litres, or £1,260 a year.
Last year petrol was £1.35 a litre, and thus £184 a year less for the average car.
Fuel is insanely cheap in the UK in historic terms, just not as cheap as it was last year.
Why are you choosing the 2022 energy crises as your baseline? Not only your choice was arbitary but you managed to choose the year fuel was at its highest as a reaction to the war in Ukraine.
That price was not representative or typical, it was a spike. You can see it here.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices/time...
We will see exactly the same thing again in a few years when people are 'shocked' that prices are rising again. And then expect the government to step in, even though on the interim they've bought a massive car on PCP rather than take some personal responsibility and buy a car that they can afford when inevitably something goes wrong.
"Insanely cheap" for the UK to feels really strange for those of us way over here who tend to forget how good we have it.
For sure, EVs are far more efficient at converting a kwh of energy into forward motion, but if we assume 35 mpg (9.25 miles/litre) for the gas car, we need about 970wh to travel 1 mile. A modern EV can manage a mile on ~260wh, almost a quarter of the gas requirement.
There are public charging networks in the UK averaging 92p/kwh - we know we need much less energy to move the more efficient EV, but even with this adjustment fuel cost per mile looks like:
petrol at UK average today: 17p/mi
Electric at very expensive public charger: ~24p/mi !!
At many chargers, there are no savings at all. For comparisons sake, that 92p kwh would be just 28.6p on the most expensive domestic electricity supply, and charging at home would be ~8p per mile on the worst possible tariffs.
I've probably done some bad math somewhere here, but I think the broad picture is correct.
https://www.racfoundation.org/research/mobility/still-standi...
Wales – 75% of households have – or could have – off-street parking and EV charging England – 68% Scotland – 63%
In London, sure, most homes don't have off-street parking and ev charging, but then only half the households in London have a car
https://content.tfl.gov.uk/travel-in-london-2024-car-ownersh...
But that's assuming we're just running power plants off of petrol and fuels. Coal is much cheaper than petroleum in some cases. There's also a lot of people who get their power from nuclear, hydro, solar, and wind. In many cases, your electric prices are not at all affected by the increases in petrullium prices, because most of your electricity is coming from something else. In fact, I doubt there's any place in the world that all your electricity is coming from petroleum fuels. Even if that's the major input, there are almost undoubtedly other sources in the mix.
Over 25% of this is then lost in transmission and distribution[0] (down to 45%). Then 10-25% of that lost in charging the car[1] (down to 40%). Finally, the car itself loses about 10-15% of that[2] (down to 35%).
[0] https://www.statista.com/statistics/322834/transmission-dist...
[1] https://go-e.com/en/magazine/ev-charging-losses
[2] https://evreporter.com/understanding-the-complete-efficiency...
If you charge at home, and you don't have a car tariff, it'll be ~25-30p per kwhr
If you get a car charging tariff then you'll be paying ~9p a kwhr.
if you are brave then you can use an agile prices which depends on the weather you can be paid to charge (my record was -11p a unit) however in winter it can be a lot high, like 45p a unit.
Charging on the street can be around 50p a kwhr up to 98p a kwhr
In Canada most of that is pretty opaque. Electricity tariffs are not really something that most households would worry about. Businesses and Industrial usage do though
Yeah, the Nissan Leaf was a high-torque monster. Though to describe the BMW i3 as a muscle car is... not the descriptor I would use.
EVs were not sold by every OEM as high-power drag-strip rock stars - that's just what it took to get Americans to pay attention
How much will you spend on fuel during that decade? Seems likely it will be more than today's upfront cost differential. Possibly a lot more.
Disregarding the range because that's a different topic. Fundamentally EVs will be of a different size than ICEs because the big and heavy battery has to placed somewhere low, which is usually under the passenger area floor. Then the car must be higher to accomodate that and also sturdier etc., so at that point we have a bigger and heavier car for the same interior space. And also pricier of course. So it's better to forget the Seat Leon Combi and look at the EVs with fresh eyes.
Or you can retrofit an EN to a ICE shell, like Stellantis did with eg the Opel Astra TS which is also cheap for an EV, but mostly everyone agrees this is a dead end.
One more point regarding the price - that's our own (EU) making. Chinese EVs in China are much much cheaper.
https://www.globalchinaev.com/post/byd-edges-out-vw-to-becom...
As someone who lives near a busy road, I'm 100% all for them for this reason alone
The boy-racers doing 2x the speed limit with their loud exhausts and poppin can go do one
ffs why can't we have nice things??
The amount of 'eco' things that turn out worse...
The scheme has cost billions in lost revenue and it's the only reason it can exist. The exact accounting is up for debate because it's complex but nonetheless.
Can't find it now but there's a breakdown of the cars supplied somewhere and even when small BMWs etc were available very few people chose them - most people chose smaller average cars
Motability also plays a huge role in priming the used car market in the UK - without them there would be less choice and cars would be more expensive
You can't buy the car, and your limited on miles to 10k, and VAT is now payable, along with insurnace tax. plus you can't lease a landrover.
but like I just don't get it. its not like you have a choice to be on PIP. its fucking humiliating to get on PIP, and keep on it.
Though AIUI US companies are largely failing to keep up there, now, too; diesel city buses are on the way out, and electric bus powertrains are largely Chinese or European.
You can base it on the wholesale price, great if you have battery storage
https://octopus.energy/smart/agile/
Or just an overnight rate
https://octopus.energy/smart/intelligent-octopus-go/
Again if you put in a £5k 10kWh battery you are golden, as you put 8kWh into your car and 8kWh into your battery every night, dropping your electric cost to £38 a month (plus the standing charge, which is far higher)
Many people choose a single fixed or variable rate tariff, but there are also off-peak tariffs that are very cheap at night but slightly more expensive in the day (designed for EV users), or even tariffs where the rate changes every 30 minutes depending on what is being generated - in this case when there is excess solar and wind generation then sometimes the rate even goes negative and you are paid to use the excess power.
Most places I lived had this set up.
(Nowadays smart meters offer many more options.)
It's almost always a bad financial decision to buy a new car. The first-year depreciation is unreal.
We just bought a 1 year old Audi Q5 in the US for ~30% discount over new. And with the Audi CPO program, the warranty is just as long as a new model.
I dunno ....
At least two EV manufacturers offer a 7 year warranty on new cars on all parts INCLUDING the battery.
Furthermore, if you're going to include distributional losses, then let's also drop the available petrol by 10-15% to account for refining etc.
Finally, on anything resembling a sunny day, my car charges entirely of rooftop solar, so what efficiency do we assign to that?
25TWh annual distribution losses off of ~300TWh usage per year is 8% loss.
Even in Wales, 25% can't. This isn't a figure you can ignore.
And that's a hypothetical, it relies on landlords playing ball etc. then there's the social issues. On the north of England we have lots of terraces built for mill workers, these aren't owned by the richest on society. So then you're in the situation of charging the poorest more for transport. And these are necessarily on towns with good transport links (think 1 bus and hour).
Now clearly that 25% and 20% won't overlap exactly, but they will overlap a lot
When 80% of cars in the UK are electric and 20% are those households who rely on public streets to store their belongings for 23 hours a day, then sure that will be a problem
Given that there's only about 2 million electric cars in the UK, yet 18 million homes which can charge electric cars, that's a long way off.
You're gonna have to cite sources on that one, but I would sincerely doubt that £77 a week will allow you to lease an Audi.
Also the pip claimant has to be probed by a panel every three years to keep getting the benefit, unlike say a state pension (but I paid for that I mean possibly you did, its still a non means tested benefit, unlike PIP)
https://media.audi.com/is/content/audi/country/uk/en/find-an...
which on lease is about £80 a month more expensive https://www.gateway2lease.com/cars/audi/a3-saloon/22564/tfsi... (motobility is £308 a month)
so its not like its a luxury car, its a new car.
Personally I'm more pissed off about pensioners on final salary still getting state pension, even though they don't need it. Thats far more fucking expensive and doesn't serve a purpose, well apart from buying votes. means test that shit, right now.
This is categorically false.
> Motability also plays a huge role in priming the used car market in the UK
You could also argue that it's distorting the market. Having billions worth of subsidies supporting a market isn't necessarily good.
Even the F-series popularity is kinda overstated by this because other cars are more fragmented.
I do think F-150 buyers tend to be more conservative than average car buyers and more receptive to anti-EV FUD for both political and cultural reasons.
Even within each sub-brand of the group, they often work with different manufacturers.
Though Sytner (the biggest) tend to have single-manufacturer dealerships.
Probably a mix of both on both sides of the pond I imagine?
And there's less rigmarole during the process. Less aggressive sales tactics I believe
Often there will be multiple dealers on adjoining lots, owned by the same conglomerate- but they'll maintain some illusion of independence.
I bought a Hyundai recently and the Hyundai dealer was right next to a Volvo dealer and a VW dealer. They're all part of "Sheppard Auto Group" and they share a parking lot, but the buildings are completely disconnected. However when it came time to actually sign the paperwork they led me from the Hyundai dealer to an office in the VW building, because that's where the sales manager who was working that day was. They also share a service department.
However, if I'd wanted to buy a VW though and I went in to the Hyundai building I suspect they would've made me walk over to the VW building and talk to those salespeople, and all my paperwork has the name of the Hyundai dealer on it. The point is you'd never go to "Sam's Car Dealership" and find a Ford parked next to a Honda parked next to a Chevrolet.
Independent used car lots are a free-for-all though.
Which is 21p per mile, for my petrol car
at 98p a kwhr its 20p per mile.
but in practice the electric car is 3 pence a mile for me (average car charging price for me is 15p a kwhr)
Of course, thats why I've been clear all my assumptions are for 260wh/mi, which I think is a very fair middle ground figure to compare to a 35mpg car - one can pick far more fuel efficient gas cars for this comparison too, the possibilities are endless.
I think your numbers still illustrate the same point though; if you can't charge at home, an EV is not necessarily cheaper to fuel, and the gap between the public charger price and the cost to a private consumer with home charging is still far too big. 98p vs 15p is staggering.
Given they are a relatively gutless car to begin with (1 litre 3 cylinder 70hp tinpot engine) I did wonder what the zigzag/lightning icon was on the dash so I googled it.
Turns out the system uses a 11Ah lithium battery that lives under the driver/passenger seat that charges through regenerative braking. It gives a small boost during acceleration (mostly at low speeds so it's more for stop-start urban driving), I think it's not much more than a glorified belt around the crankshaft giving a few extra hp.
No appreciable benefit to it that I could feel, but if it's helping us burn fewer dinosaurs then that's all good. (It's still a car but much better than a massive wankpanzer.)
The slight compromise is at constant highway cruising speeds, it may let the engine take over, since the efficiency calculus likely is more favorable in those conditions. It uses a clutch to do this, and only has a single gear ratio, rather than the messy setup of typical parallel hybrids.
Perhaps it is the "London bubble" on HN as I feel that no-one is registering that 100k+ is a really, really small minority...
And I wonder how much of that £3k is just saved up benefits...
Which disabilities require an Audi or BMW btw?
That is an interesting perspective. We do not forget how good we have it, because we choose not to put high taxes on gasoline and diesel. Do drivers in the UK tend to forget that taxes are more than half the retail price they pay at the pump? Sometimes way over half. That is a policy decision.
I imagine it also varies somewhat across the US. Locally, our city does not use property taxes for road maintenance, we have a pavement fee which is billed through the utilities system (same one that handles water & sewer, for example). Plus gas tax from the state. It could be argued that the distinction between the pavement fee and property taxes is subtle, though.
America seems to have a lot of large vehicles that use a lot of fuel. The UK less so.
The tax will have played a part in this (how much?).
How did you find this?
Not really. The petrol drivetrain takes up so much room there's no space for a large battery, so the much smaller battery will only take you a short distance if you used it alone, plus now it's much less efficient because you're carrying around a heavy engine with you.
They put tiny batteries in a lot of plug-in hybrids. Unless you live very close to work, you’ll struggle to use it as primarily an EV
Which is ~enough to cover the vast majority of commutes, and the majority of US commutes.
Keep in mind that even if 20% of your commute is done on petrol, the other 80% isn't.
---
[1] Yes, there are PHEVs with shorter ranges, but those tend to be weird luxury models that for some compliance reason have a battery strapped to them.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/oct/16/plug-in-...
IIRC, the latest Honda Civic Hybrid has the ICE decoupled from the drivetrain most of the time (even if it is running to generate power), but it can couple to the drivetrain under some conditions?
Almost certainly why nearly all hybrids have been parallel hybrids up to now. What is changing, I think, is that a significant number of people are warming to the idea of a BEV, and want all of the benefits of that, but want to fall back on gasoline in a pinch. Thus EREV, or series hybrid, which provides that crutch. Expensive, though.
No, that would be an EREV.
> https://getneocharge.com/a/blog/identifying-your-240v-dryer-...
Almost everyone I know with an EV charging at home just reused the 240v dryer socket to avoid paying for a dedicated fast charger. It's often cheaper too to have an electrician fit a new 240v socket instead of the dedicated charger as well.
Let me guess, you live in Germany? :)
Three phase power is definitely not 100% in the EU. Not even in Germany, though adoption does tend to be higher than neighboring countries.
And FWIW, I find that my induction cooktop works wonderfully on plain old 240V 40A, so I do not think it is a requirement to get three-phase for that ;-).
Unless you are regularly doing upwards of 150 km/ day, it's fine.
It's used for dryer, stove etc.
[0] Okay, technically 240V did not become official until around 1967, but the split-phase design was there from the beginning. They capped it at 240V to stop the creeping up that had been going on in the earlier part of the century. This is why you still have a lot of people (not all of them old enough to have been alive in 1967, oddly enough) that refer to 240V as 220.
Considering the battery and motors for these tiny EV's is only 100 lbs or so, it is probably still worth having.
I actually wanted a PHEV, since my car is mostly used for local driving but I also drive hundreds of miles for work trips. Unfortunately I couldn't find one I liked.
https://www.nimblefins.co.uk/best-car-insurance/average-car-...
> The average car journey distance in the UK is approximately 8.2 miles
> Realistically how many people are actually plugging those in?
Answer: almost no one. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/oct/16/plug-in-...
> In much of Europe the majority of PHEVs are purchased by companies because of tax incentives.
Love to see some evidence for that being the majority
This should not be too surprising, once you learn another fact that is probably more surprising: corporate sales make up a majority of car sales in much of Europe. Around 65% in Germany, 60% in UK, 55% in France (the 3 largest car markets in Europe).
Corporate buyers love PHEVs. They get many of the same or similar tax breaks that full EVs get, whereas hybrids that are not PHEVs usually just get the same corporate tax treatment that ICE cars get. Even though a PHEV usually costs more upfront than a similar regular hybrid which usually costs more than a similar pure ICE, the tax breaks make the PHEV a better deal even if the company has no intention of ever plugging it in.
Compare to individual buyers. They get much fewer incentives from the government. For them the higher cost of a PHEV over a regular hybrid only makes sense if they are going to plug the thing in.
Countries are starting to phase out the PHEV tax breaks for corporations, so we should start seeing the percent of PHEVs that actually get plugged in start to go up.
[1] https://theicct.org/publication/european-market-monitor-cars...
[2] https://www.fleetnews.co.uk/news/car-industry-news/2022/05/3...
you are right in that corporate sales make up ~60% of new car registrations eu wide, that is kinda crazy.
But 11.7% of EU corporate registrations are PHEV [1] versus 9.8% overall [2]. So, it’s a little higher, but not really meaningfully higher.
So yeah, ~61% of new PHEVs registered to corporations. But I’m assuming a majority of those corporate cars get resold after a few years , entering the private registered market. So I don’t really know how to guess at the % of corporate ownership of cars currently on the road. Let’s wildly guess that half of new car reg corporate PHEVs are in private hands now.
That leaves ~33% of total PHEVs corporate owned, which is a sizable chunk and would affect the statistics somewhat, if those folk truly have different behavior.
Btw this analysis of the whole situation has a ton more data than the guardian I originally linked [3]. A huge part of the problem is even in full electric mode the PHEVs still used gas 1/3rd of the time due to weak ev engines. So even if plugged in they’re still a lie in real world emissions.
So I doubt changing the corporate ownership % will change the results that much, but we’ll see.
The biggest change to watch for will actually be once the UF (utility factor) for EU PHEVs is adjusted down in 2027 to match the real world emissions [3]. If they do that, I expect the category to collapse in sales as it won’t make sense for manufacturers to subsidize them as an emissions loophole anymore.
[1] https://www.transportenvironment.org/articles/eu-regulation-... [2] https://www.acea.auto/files/Press_release_car_registrations_... [3] https://www.transportenvironment.org/articles/eu-regulation-...
In practice, most are mediocre range, low-speed only evs that effectively no one bothers to charge regularly because its impractical and annoying. The manufactures claim 80% reductions in emissions, and use those credits to allow them to sell more gas cars in the EU market. But real world emission reduction is 20%. They know this, they've known for years. Its a scam.
https://electrek.co/2026/02/19/biggest-study-yet-shows-plug-...
Some newer toyotas, newer BMWs and the coming EREVs will actually be able to be electric cars most of the time, and might live up closer to the claims. Doesnt change the fact the category has been mostly fraud until now.
Something with a 60 mile electric range will likely satisfy all of their day-to-day driving. The generator means they don't have to charge though, so they can still take road trips without worrying about electric range.
In practice though, they're somewhat impractical. You still need an entire ICE drivetrain AND a moderately sized battery and electric motor, driving the price up.
This has been a perfect car for my use case, but the big caveat is my short commute. If your daily commute fits inside that short range (or one way commute if there's a charger at your workplace), this can be a great fit. A+++, highly recommended.
If your work commute is significantly longer than a PHEV's battery range, or if you don't have a convenient place to charge it, then it's a much less attractive proposition.
Most people don't end up charging their battery because it still has an ICE so why bother? So now they have the worst of both worlds. Complex ICE machinery that needs regular service and heavy battery that doesn't end up being used.
You can also have a much smaller engine for a much bigger car, since you only need to cover average not peak power usage.
You also in most designs eliminate the gearbox.
It just doesn't have much range: only about 25 miles on my 2018 model. Newer models advertise up to 44 miles on EV.
A colleague drives a BMW 3something hybrid and as far as i know has a 14kWh battery..
Thats good for about a 100km, but i very much wouldn't consider that a "fully" electric car by any means (edit: did you edit your post? couldve sworn you said "fully electric" instead of "mediocre range"?)...
Also, what most people don't realize: if you're only (or mostly) driving it electric, you're putting many more cycles onto that tiny battery.
...which usually costs as much as a "regular" EV battery, x times the size.
https://evclinic.eu/2024/09/05/bmw-hybrid-repeated-battery-f... for example...
https://carnewschina.com/2026/05/01/byd-deploys-new-heyuan-h...
I had a PHEV Honda and I put 20 gallons of fuel in it over 6 years. The system works in the niche for which it was designed.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2026/feb/18/plug-in-...
https://electrek.co/2026/02/19/biggest-study-yet-shows-plug-...
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/oct/16/plug-in-...
the link to the underlying most recent fraunhofer study referred to by the first two seems broken sadly, so i cant get the breakdown by manufacturer anymore. But the data on aggregate is clear - on average the PHEVs cars out there today spend very little time on average in pure EV mode. If they did there would be more than ~20% reduction in emissions.
The buyers wanted a petrol car. And they choose to fill with petrol. You need your own garage to make plugging in worthwhile (and avoid getting charging cable nicked). Consumers perhaps prefer to avoid the hassle of plugging in?
In New Zealand there's a visible disincentive of a yearly tax on pluggable hybrids (to pay for road use). In NZ roads are paid by taxes earmarked for that.
It would be better to say that all of the money from road use and petrol taxes are spent on the roads. Those taxes don't actually cover the cost of maintaining the road system.
At which point it kind of becomes moot that those taxes are ring-fenced for paying for roads. Since I've lived here people keep repeating that ring-fenced fact like its some kind of special thing. General taxation and council taxes are subsiding just the road maintenance, and completely paying for new build roads.
Yes they almost did.
Only a few years ago the National Land Transport Fund (NLTF) was almost entirely self-sustaining, funded by road users.
Recently Crown funding (grants and loans) expanded significantly to ~40% of fund income.
But approximately 30% of government transport spending is being spent on rail (to placate voters I think). Before the Land Transport (Rail) Legislation Act 2020, not much we spent by the NLTF on rail.
Currently ~3% of driven kilometres by car use electricity - so as that number increases, BEV and PHEV vehicles will need to have increased taxation. Presumably something like $700 per annum (currently about how much a person driving a petrol car pays on excise tax).
Ultimately it is almost tautological that road users pay for roads, since government spending comes from taxes, and most people use cars. How things get earmarked is just sophisticated accounting.
2. i suspect but i have no way to prove... the PHEVs sold in america tended to be way better EVs - there's no similar total fleet emissions laws so no incentive to subsidize shitty/fraudulent PHEVs in the US.
I don't know about the whole world, but in both the US and Europe nearly half of the hybrids on the road are from Toyota, so unless nearly everything else is two parallel drive chains linked with clutches whatever Toyota does is the more common type.
Toyota uses a series-parallel system that works by having a planetary gear system that connects the ICE, a large electric motor, a small electric motor, and a drive shaft all together.
The planetary gear system functions as a power splitting device and a continuously variable transmission. It lets them direct power flow in a bunch of different ways. Here's a summary based on Wikipedia. (MB == the bigger battery, 12V == the regular 12V batter, ICE == the ICE engine, MG1 == the smaller electric motor, MG2 == the larger electric motor):
• Aux power: MB -> DC/DC converter -> 12V
• Charge: ICE -> MG1 -> MB
• EV drive: MB -> MG2 -> wheels
• Moderate acceleration: ICE -> wheels, ICE -> MG1 -> MG2 -> wheels
• Highway: ICE -> wheels, ICE -> MG1 -> MB
• Heavy power, such as on steep hills: ICE -> wheels, ICE -> MG1 -> MB, ICE -> MG1 -> MG2 -> wheels
• Max power: ICE -> wheels, ICE -> MG1 -> MG2 -> wheels, MB -> MG2 -> wheels
• Regenerative braking: wheels -> MG2 -> MB
• B-mode braking: Wheels -> MG2 -> MB, Wheels -> MG1 -> ICE
This is a big part of why Toyota hybrids are at the top of reliability rankings. Compared to a pure ICE they replace the clutch, the transmission, the starter motor, the alternator, the reverse gear set, and the flywheel with the planetary gear power splitting device. the two electric motors, and electronics. The power splitting device has very few movings parts--just the gears themselves, a pawl that can mechanically lock the gears when parked, and fluid pumps. The gears only move by rotating, unlike in a conventional transmission where they also change position. This makes their hybrids mechanically much simpler than a pure ICE.
Data collected across 600.000 vehicles in Europe show that most people don't and that emissions are just a smidge under typical ICE vehicles. If you factor in the high emissions produced during battery productions it looks to be an overall bad package.
The idea itself is certainly good but the real world simply doesn't show it.
https://www.evshift.com/368695/do-people-actually-charge-the...
For example, the sluggish 0-60 is due to the design being unable to get all the power from the engine to the wheels at slow speeds, due to the electrical path through the CVT gearbox being too small.
The funny noises when going down really big hills are due to the system having no way to dump excess energy after the battery is fully charged and being forced to rev the engine at 5000 rpm with no fuel to waste some.
The slow throttle response is due to the engine always running at 80% throttle for efficiency, which means if you suddenly need more power you can only quickly get an additional 20% before waiting for the rpm to slowly rise and give lots of power in a few seconds.
EV's do have similar design limitations (drive on a racetrack and you'll need to let the hardware cool between laps), but they seem easier to overcome by simply sizing the system slightly bigger to hide the limits.
"Even when the cars were driven in electric mode, the analysis found that levels of pollution were well above official estimates. The researchers said this was because electric motors were not strong enough to operate alone, with their engines burning fossil fuels for almost one-third of the distance travelled in electric mode."
The manufacturers dont list this admittedly complicated crossover, so you cant say whether one does or doesnt from a spec sheet. The aggregate data is clear though.
“In practice, the combustion engine frequently assists the electric motor in CD mode, especially during acceleration, at higher speeds or uphill driving. On average, the ICE supplies power during almost one third of the distance driven in CD mode. This is largely due to insufficient e-motor power, as most PHEVs are not designed to operate fully electrically under typical real-world conditions.”
“ The largest gap between WLTP and real-world PHEV emissions occurs in CD mode, often referred to as an “electric” mode where real-world CD emissions are even higher than the WLTP average. According to T&E analysis, real-world CO₂ emissions in CD mode average around 68 gCO₂/km, which is nearly nine times as high as the estimated 8 gCO₂/km in CD mode under the WL TP methodology, and almost twice the WL TP average overall emissions (including both electric and combustion modes). In practice, the combustion engine frequently assists the electric motor in CD mode, especially during acceleration, at higher speeds or uphill driving. On average, the ICE supplies power during almost one third of the distance driven in CD mode. This is largely due to insufficient e-motor power, as most PHEVs are not designed to operate fully electrically under typical real-world conditions. This relationship is illustrated by the correlation between e-motor-to-combustion-engine power ratio and emissions in CD mode: vehicles with an average power ratio between electric motor and combustion engine of 0.9, emit approximately 45 gCO2/km in CD mode. An average PHEV with a ratio of 0.7 has emissions of around 68 gCO2/km. Vehicles in the lower decile in terms of their ratio of electric motor to combustion engine power, where it drops to around 0.5, have average CD mode emissions of 105 gCO2/km. In real-world conditions, petrol PHEVs consume around 3 L/100km in electric mode. “
https://uploads.transportenvironment.org/production/files/20...