Post by Barry Kresch

Tesla Continues to Lap the Field

The chart at the top of the post shows the trend of all EV makes and shows net registrations at each point in time. It makes very obvious the fact that registrations are largely concentrated among a small number of companies. This trend begins with 2017, which was the first year we received data from the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV), and covers every data point we have through July 2021. Beginning with January 2020, updates have been provided semi-annually as that frequency is driven by the statutory requirements for EV reporting imposed upon the DMV.

Tesla has continued to have substantial increases. Toyota had a notable pop. Chevrolet reversed the negative momentum and gained modestly. Ford, BMW, Hyundai, Honda, Volvo, Porsche, Chrysler and Jeep all had modest increases. Other makes had very small increases or were flat.  I will look at the vehicles that were added and drill down to models to see what caused the changes.

The pie chart below shows the vehicles added by make for the first half of the year. Tesla, with 1421 adds, was double the nearest competitor, Toyota, though the latter still had a strong period with 761 adds. The other makes with over 200 adds were Chevrolet, Hyundai, BMW, Ford, and Jeep.

This second pie chart is filtered for BEVs (the title of the chart does not change when the filter is applied), where Tesla accounted for 6 in 10 vehicles added followed by Chevy, Hyundai, and Ford.

The charts below are a filtered review of net registration trends by model within make (i.e. net cumulative registrations). This provides some context to how lineups and model impact have evolved over time. There is some degree of a rising tide lifting all boats, but there are some new models that are decidedly making a difference. They are presented in order of the number of registered units for the make.

Tesla

Starting with Tesla, while the Model 3 continues to register significant gains at each data point, and remains the most widely registered model with 3,426 vehicles, the momentum has shifted to the Model Y. The first bar, the small one, for the Model Y is small due to lack of supply. While Tesla still can’t seem to build them fast enough (as of this writing, we are advised of a ~6 month wait for most orders), the delivery count is now substantial at 1,329, approaching that of the Model S at 1,580, which it will certainly pass when we receive our next update in January 2022. Again, we are looking at registrations, but it indicates that the Model Y is outselling the Model 3. Tesla has a new plant under construction in Texas and a new battery design (the 4860) forthcoming. These developments should speed the production of the Model Y and enable Tesla to begin deliveries of the Cybertruck. Inside EVs reports Tesla having over 1.25 million pre-orders for the Cybertruck as of early August.

Toyota

The next largest make is Toyota. The Prius Prime PHEV has been around a while and had displayed a flattening trend, but registrations jumped in the first half of 2021 to 2,152. This makes it the second most widely registered model. Added to that is a decent start for the new RAV4 Prime, also a PHEV, but with one of the higher electric ranges in its class at 42 miles. There are 386 of them registered and there have been reports of their being supply-constrained. Toyota briefly made a BEV RAV4 in limited quantities. There are 2 of them in CT. The other vehicle here, the Mirai is a fuel cell car. There are 3 of those.

Toyota has been resistant to BEVs for lack of any obvious reason. They introduced a concept SUV this year, the bZ4X, and have announced a plan for 15 BEV models by 2025 (not necessarily all of them for the USA).

Chevrolet

The third most widely registered make is Chevrolet. The most widely registered Chevy is still the Volt (PHEV) that was discontinued in 2019. For a time, before the Model 3, it was the most widely registered model in the state. The decline over the last 4 data points is pretty gradual, considering the discontinuation, and could reflect a presence as a used vehicle. Chevy re-introduced the Bolt in 2021 and significantly reduced the price (possibly due to GM phasing out of the federal tax incentive). The Bolt has been a lethargic presence since its introduction, but the combination of the new model and lower price enabled it to register a jump to 787 units registered. The new EUV version of the Bolt was not yet available during the analysis period.

Ford

Ford jumped into fourth position among EV makes, very clearly on the strength of the new Mustang Mach-E. Ford has been manufacturing EVs, both BEV and PHEV, for some time without any models getting traction. More recently, they have switched to a strategy of building an EV version of their most iconic brands, the Mustang and the F-150. In the case of the Mustang, it is more a case of branding as the electric Mustang is an EUV. The F-150 Lightning really is an electric F-150 pickup.

The Mach-E BEV has 136 units, enough to make a difference for Ford overall. It has been a supply constrained vehicle and dealers have been selling them above MSRP. The Escape is a successful compact SUV and Ford has introduced a PHEV version. There is only one registered, but it is only just about to be rolled out. The F-150 BEV is not scheduled to begin deliveries until second quarter 2022. Reports are that Ford has pre-orders for over 100,000 units.

BMW

The next ranking make is BMW. As you can see, they have quite a few plug-in models. After initially building the stubby, though fun to drive i3, which is primarily a BEV, though there is an option for a small gasoline range-extender engine, BMW has pivoted to PHEV versions of its ICE lineup. The notable model here is the X5 Xdrive40e. The 2021 version boasts a substantial electric range improvement from only 14 miles to 50 miles, plus a 6-cylinder gas engine. It has become BMW’s top plug in with 252 units. There was also a jump for the X3, though only to 74 units. The C Evolution is a motorcycle.

Hyundai

Hyundai is next and the Kona compact EUV is what is driving sales for them. There are 304 Kona vehicles registered. Hyundai announced that Ioniq will become its EV sub-brand, though the Kona is branded Hyundai.

Nissan

Nissan was one of the first entrants into the EV market with its BEV Leaf in 2010. It’s registration stats have been flat since 2019. As of today, the Leaf is still their only entry, though they have expanded the number of trim levels and improved the range. They are planning to launch an EUV model called the Ariya in 2022.

Honda

Honda is a major automaker that has been largely MIA in the EV space. A few years ago, they introduced the Clarity PHEV. Club members who own one have reported a good experience with it and the electric range is among the highest in the category at 47 miles. Due to Honda pulling back on distribution, the number of registered Claritys has been declining. A small increase this year offered some hope, but I read in the publication, EV Adoption, that Honda has canceled the Clarity PHEV and fuel cell models. Honda has announced a BEV EUV called the Prologue for a model year 2024 introduction, along with an Acura stablemate.

Volvo

Volvo has several EVS, mostly PHEVs plus the new BEV, XC40 Recharge. The company saw a spike from its XC90 PHEV to 227 units registered. This high-end, large SUV only gets 18 miles of electric range. The new XC40 Recharge is off to a slow start with 31 units. Volvo has announced an aggressive pivot to EVs with an all-electric lineup by 2030 and has moved EV sales to its online portal.

Porsche

Porsche has also been in the game for a while and is a leader among high-end automakers not named Tesla. Their newest introduction, the BEV Taycan sports car, had the biggest increase to 116 units.

Audi

Audi got into EVs with the A3 PHEV. It didn’t get traction, but the newer BEV E-Tron has been growing, now at 169 units, as well as to a lesser degree the Q5 PHEV compact EUV with 64 units.

Everyone Else

At this point, we start getting into some very small numbers, but I will mention a few others.

Chrysler, which has only one EV, the PHEV Pacifica minivan, rose to 214 units.

Jeep introduced its first EV, the PHEV Wrangler, which had a decent first year at 202 units.

New luxury carmaker Polestar (part of Geely, the owner of Volvo) has only 8 units for its Polestar 2 hatchback. (There were no Polestar 1 vehicles, an expensive, high performance PHEV.)

Mercedes has announced upcoming BEVs, the EQ series, with the EQS (like its S series), EQE (like its E series), and EQB, and electric EUV. The EQS is scheduled to arrive this year. The others will be 2022. Up to this point, Mercedes is another example of a major manufacturer that sells very few EVs. There are 8 models with registered units in the state with the highest being the GLC 350e at a measly 61 units.

Volkswagen, which has also announced aggressive targets for EVs, introduced the ID.4 in this country following a successful introduction of the smaller ID.3 in Europe. At this point, there are only 57 of these registered in CT, but it is still in a rollout phase.

Every screenshot here is taken from the Interactive EV Dashboard, July 2021 on the website. Using the slicers (checkboxes) enables drilldown to individual makes and models as I have done here.

July 1 EV Registration Data

Post by Barry Kresch

Overall Trends

Following an earlier blog post updating topline registration data, I have now been through the details and will cover them over the course of several more posts.

As earlier reported, total electric vehicle registrations now total 17,217. This represents an increase of 36% over July 2020.

Definitely an improvement, but we need more on a sustained basis. The glimmer of good news is that, not surprisingly, the bulk of the growth was recent. The last 6 months are growing at close to the pace we need. The chart below looks at semi-annual growth for the past 18 months.

Fuel Type

Below is the trend by fuel type from 2017 through July 2021. For those new to the lingo, BEV = battery electric vehicle, PHEV = Plug-in Hybrid EV, BEMC = battery electric motorcycles, FCEV = Fuel Cell EV. BEVs have continued to outpace the other major category, PHEV.

BEVs outpaced the field. I will get into more detail in a subsequent post, but the big difference-maker was the Model Y. PHEVs, having been flat pretty much since the demise of the Chevy Volt, rebounded this year on the strength of two Toyota models: Prius Prime and the new RAV4 Prime.

When I have discussed the information on this project with reporters over the years, the first thing they ask is how many fuel cell vehicles there are. There are 3, as there have been. These vehicles are not currently available to buy in the state.

Vehicle Body Type

A new field in the dataset this year is vehicle body type. An imponderable: Will I continue to receive it? The two pie charts below show the vehicles that were new to the file in first-half ’21 and all EVs as of July 1. So the vehicles in the first chart are included in the second and comprise about 25% of the total. With the Model Y and some other new models, the SUV percentage of the fleet is growing rapidly. 36% of the adds were SUVs, bringing the total file to 20%.

This probably understates how popular these vehicles are becoming. Keep in mind that this file is registrations and not sales. If I restrict the new vehicle chart to the most recent vehicles, MY 2021 and 2022, the SUV percentage goes to 44%.

All data in this post come from the Interactive EV Dashboard, July 2021

Post by Barry Kresch

An Opportunity for Large Cuts in Emissions Along With Major Budgetary Savings.

When the Westport Police were doing their diligence in advance of the purchase of a Tesla Model 3 for use as a patrol car, they worked with Sustainable Westport (SW) to run a set of estimates for the payback time period. After running the numbers, they were confident that within 3 years, the purchase premium would be recovered.

The vehicle entered service in February 2020. This spring, the EV Club approached the Westport Police about their interest in doing a deep dive on the financials: purchase, customization, operation, and maintenance. The police shared granular details of costs, including a maintenance schedule, which is the basis for the analysis. The completed analysis showed that full payback happens in year one and considerable savings are realized by year 4.

When I initially started the analysis, my expectation was that the SW numbers were reasonable and we would end up somewhere in that neighborhood. I hadn’t thought the financials would end up being such a slam-dunk with savings of $52,000 over 4 years, enough to buy a new Tesla.

Police fleet vehicles offer a bigger opportunity than initially expected.

This Tesla Pilot was only a test, but it begs the question: with such strong results, is there any reason not to go all-in for EVs, and forget gradualism?

To help understand what the financial ramifications look like, I used the information I had learned about the Tesla and the Ford Explorer comparison vehicle to model what a transition might look like. This is a general, somewhat macro exercise, and not specific to Westport or anywhere else. I would need more data for that. Nevertheless, I believe it is possible to generate directional numbers with the information at hand. The scenario, which is for a fleet of 12 vehicles, is obviously not New York City, but the basic findings wouldn’t change if it were larger.

Scenario

• A starting fleet of 12 patrol cars, 4 Ford Crown Victorias, and 8 Ford Explorers. The Crown Vic was a ubiquitous patrol car before Ford discontinued them. Many are still around, including in Westport.
• It is assumed the price for the Crown Vic and the Ford Explorer are the same. They probably aren’t but doubt the difference is that much.
• Service life is 4 years for the Ford patrol cars and 3 vehicles are turned over each year. The Tesla service life is 6 years. The service life is what is used in Westport.
• In the business as usual (BAU) scenario, each vehicle is replaced by a new Ford Explorer.
• In the ZEV scenario, each car is replaced by a Tesla Model 3.
• All cars are fully customized for law enforcement. When a new car replaces a like car, it is assumed that customization is reused and a zero cost is assigned in those instances. (This is most certainly understating the cost as the customization presumably does not install itself. If I had those costs, it would narrow the customization differential between Ford and Tesla due to less frequent turnover of the Teslas.) Also, in real life, if there is a model refresh, that can cause customization parts not to fit. Based on history, that is likely to happen more frequently with the Ford. But for the sake of keeping it simple for this exercise, all customization is treated as 100% re-usable.
• It is assumed that the first 6 Teslas will have to incur full customization costs and in the BAU case, the same goes for the Explorers that replace Crown Vics. But in general, the BAU scenario has a lesser degree of customization.

The chart at the top of the post depicts the cumulative savings in this hypothetical example of 12 patrol cars over 12 years with staggered turnover. It comes in just a whisker short of $800,000. The charts below show the cumulative cost lines by year for each scenario. The charts for the fixed costs are calculated on an amortized basis with fixed costs divided by the respective service life of each vehicle.

Components

The three charts below break this up into the 3 categories of expense: acquisition, customization, and ongoing costs (fuel and maintenance).

Acquisition – This chart illustrates cumulative acquisition costs. Keep in mind that acquisition is staggered as neither scenario does envisions retiring vehicles before their normal service life ends. The cost curve slightly favors Tesla because, on an amortized basis, the annual cost of a Tesla is slightly lower. The longer this comparison is extended, the greater the differential would be.

Customization – The customization costs are somewhat lower in the BAU scenario. This is due to the fact that replacing the 8 incumbent Ford Explorers does not incur customization costs in this model. Customization costs are a bit lower for a Tesla, so in the early years as Teslas are customized and Explorers replace Crown Vics and require customization, the Tesla cost curve is lower. It catches up once the Crown Vics are fully replaced. Once the fleet is fully Tesla, that part of the curve flattens out. As noted earlier, if there are any costs incurred in the re-use of customization, it would narrow the differential as the service life is shorter for the Explorers.

Ongoing Costs – As we saw in the earlier Model 3 patrol car analysis, there are large savings in fuel and maintenance for an EV. Electricity is more efficient than gasoline and these vehicles need much less maintenance. This category saves around $940,000.

This makes manifest the ramifications inherent in the Westport Analysis. There are major savings to be had. This is not to underestimate the complexities of the budget process and the need to deal with upfront acquisition costs. However, as noted in the earlier analysis, the upfront purchase premium is recovered within one year, so it isn’t that big a burden.

We have data on the police patrol vehicles, but the same logic applies to other vehicles on the force and for a municipality in general. With savings this substantial, to borrow a Tesla term, it pays to up the pace of acquisition to Ludicrous Mode.

2 Rebates per Licensed Driver

That is the double-duty reference. A major, and welcome, change is that drivers can get the rebate twice, as opposed to the previous limit of once. There has to be a minimum of 24 months separation between the rebates. Also, June 7th starts with a clean slate. For anyone who has previously gotten a CHEAPR rebate, the count resets and you can get 2 more.

Data Appear to be in a Transitional Phase

As CHEAPR transitions to the new program (all that has preceded until now has been the “pilot) with new incentives and new rules, effective June 7th, the monthly publication of the data set looks a little stunted. We are assuming this is due to reporting changes that will need to be implemented to accurately track the new program.

For June, there were only 31 reported rebates and none after June 15th. Also, the rebates occurring after June 7th were not at the new rebate levels. We do not know if that is an artifact of moving away from the old system. I have a feeling there will be numerous corrections next month. May numbers were restated to 131 rebates.

17 of the 31 rebates were for the Tesla Model 3. The next highest model was the Toyota Prius Prime with 4.

Rebate+

There were no Rebate+ incentives awarded. This could be due to the aforementioned questions about the data or it (likely) is that the program is still working out the kinks and just beginning outreach.

I have seen some chatter on social media questioning why the incentive for a used EV is higher than for a new car. The answer lies in the population that is being targeted. Lower-income folks need more help and this was the recommendation of the consultant. CHEAPR itself does not get into the income verification business. That is something that is invasive and the program seeks to avoid that. So a proxy is used, which is receiving benefits from one of the designated public assistance programs. It remains to be seen whether this sets the bar in the right place. For very low-income people, buying even a used EV may still be a stretch. And due to the process of the buyer submitting the information and waiting for approval, they have to float the cash until they get reimbursed.

Post by Barry Kresch

17,217 electric vehicles are now registered in Connecticut

This is a topline description of the new dataset. A more in-depth profile will be available when the EV dashboard is updated in a few weeks. The usual disclaimer: This is registrations (not sales). It is cumulative and net and includes new and used vehicles, as well as someone who already owns an EV who moved into the state. On the other hand, vehicles turn over all the time, and these exit the dataset.

The new count of EVs as of July 1 has been released by the Department of Motor Vehicles. The new count of 17,217 represents a 36% increase from the 12,624 one year ago. This is an improvement from the 18% 12-month growth rate we saw in January, but it still falls short of the level of growth needed achieve the 2030 goal of 500,000 electric vehicles set forth in the MultiState Zero Emission Vehicle Action Plan Memorandum of Understanding. There is obviously still a pandemic influence over the growth rate as the economy didn’t begin to recover until the last few months. The growth rate for the past 6 months is 25%. If we were to double that, then we would be roughly on pace with what we need. I will calculate a new required compound annual growth rate and include it in a subsequent post.

One hopeful sign is that the 4335 EVs registered in the first half ot 2021 was about the same as the total for all of 2020, which was 4408. (These may not be completely apples to apples as COVID affected how registrations were handled. I think it still gives a reasonable general picture.)

Fuel Type

The definition of EV in the file includes battery electric vehicles (BEV), Plug-in Hybrid Vehicles (PHEV), Fuel Cell (FCEV), and electric motorcycles (BEMC). Below are the numbers for each.

BEVs account for 57% of all EVs. The FCEV count remains where it has been as these are not sold in the state at this time. BEMCs went from 25 to 32.

Top EV Makes

Tesla continues to lead all EV Marques by a mile.

This pattern is consistent with what we have been seeing. There are a small number of makes that account for almost all registered, followed by a long tail. This chart includes any make in double digits, not a very high bar, but there are quite a few below that level. When the dashboard is updated, it will have the full list. The only real change is that Toyota had a nice increase of 33% from January. Toyota saw increased registrations for its Prius Prime models as well as a good start for the RAV4 Prime. Tesla had a 20% increase, obviously off a larger base. Chevrolet reversed its net decline and increased 9%. The net declines were caused by the discontinued Volts gradually declining. This implies an improvement for Bolt sales.

The top make is the Tesla Model 3, which increased 16% since January. The top models are below.

The Model Y has now surpassed the Model X. It increased 101% since January. You will note that some models have multiple names due to different names for different trim levels. This is how the file comes. I will consolidate it for the dashboard as I think that is an easier comparison to make for our purposes. There are 3 Prius variations and they total 2151, making it the second most widely registered EV.

Some New Brands

These is an arbitrary list and counts of some of the newer EVs on the market. In some cases, there are still limited production runs, so it will not be indicative of how successful the vehicle will be.

Audi Q5 Plug-in – 64

BMW X5 Plug-in – 252. This has quickly become the most widely registered BMW EV.

Ford Mustang Mach-E – 136

Jeep Wrangler Plug-in – 202

Polestar 2 – 8

Proterra Electric Buses – 4

VW ID.4 – 57

Volvo Xc40 Recharge – 31

Toyota Dominates May Rebates

The two plug-in hybrid offerings from Toyota dominated the rebate activity for May. The Prius Prime (44 rebates) and the RAV4 Prime (30 rebates) together accounted for 61% of the 123 May rebates. (The April count was slightly restated to 125.) The only other vehicles in double figures were the Chevrolet Bolt (12) and Hyundai Kona (10). May marked the first appearance of a VW ID.4 with one rebate. Driven by Toyota, the balance of the rebates tilted heavily toward PHEVs, 85 vs. 38 BEVs.

The program spend continues to pace well under the available funds. The new incentives will help somewhat, but we doubt by enough.

There has been some press about the program this week as the Governor’s office issued a release about the new program, which was picked up by a number of newspapers. Readers of this blog will know that the CHEAPR board approved these modifications in February, but implementation only recently happened on June 7th.

The big headline numbers that are featured, such as up to $7500 in rebates, or on the CHEAPR home page, up to $9500, only apply to Fuel Cell vehicles, which are not currently for sale in the state. But the higher rebates and income-limited incentives are now live and we will see the early reporting in one month.

All rebates by model in the table below:

New Rules Take Effect on June 7th

Revisions to the CHEAPR EV purchase incentive program approved in February are going into effect on June 7th. This was announced at the CHEAPR board meeting on June 4th. We don’t really know if there has been much advance outreach to the dealers or not. The announcement felt abrupt so it could be that there will be a bumpy transition for a period of time. The details of the program are described in this earlier blog post written when the changes were announced.

In the meantime, the April update was released on June 5th. The March rebates were restated upward to 170 with April at 119. The Toyota Prius Prime continued as the vehicle with the most rebates at 31, followed by the Toyota RAV4 Prime (20), Chevy Bolt (19), and Tesla Model 3 (18). All other models were in single digits.

The program continues to pace below budget.

The numbers have picked up somewhat recently as the economy recovers. The slide below was shown by DEEP and indicates an upward sloping EV sales trend in CT this year through the first quarter.

Even with the March spike, the pacing is still below the baseline budget for that month. It remains to be seen if the upturn in the economy and the new rebates will raise the spend level to match the available funds. We may not really know the program’s true run rate for several months. The new LMI incentives are going to require outreach and education, and the process is more complicated. It is likely there won’t be much traction for a while.

Connecticut Has Poor Air Quality

Our small state has big air, as in big air pollution. Part of the reason is that we’re a heavily transited state situated between major metro areas. As a result, 38% of greenhouse gas emissions come from the transportation sector, according to data published by the CT Department of Energy and Environmental Protection, which is about 10 points higher than the national average. The American Lung Association in its State of the Air Report gives every county in CT a grade of F for ozone pollution, the kind of thing that exacerbates asthma and other cardio-pulmonary conditions. This backdrop underscores the importance of getting more zero-emission vehicles on the road.

Tons of CO2 Emissions Avoided

It should come as no surprise that a Ford Explorer that is subject to heavy police vehicle use burns a ton of gas. The car isn’t fuel-efficient to start with, garnering an EPA-rated 16 MPG. In police use, which veers from extended periods of idling to pedal-to-the-metal takeoffs, the “real-life” mileage recorded by the Westport Police slides to 10 MPG. The Explorer that was used in the financial analysis dashboard was driven 23,060 miles over the course of one year, translating to 2306 gallons of gasoline.

We used data from FuelEconomy.gov that pegs 1 gallon of gas as causing 20.35 pounds of CO2. Most of that weight comes from the oxygen in the atmosphere that is part of the CO2 formation that happens in the combustion process. Here is the specific link that describes the process.

The math is straightforward, 2306 gallons x 20.35 lbs per gallon equals 46,927 lbs. or 23.5 tons per year. From one car!

Note: This is a comparison of tailpipe emissions only. There are emissions associated with the manufacture of each vehicle, the fuel sources used to generate electricity in the CT grid, and the many upstream emissions of extracting petroleum, refining it into gasoline and transporting it to the various points in its journey until it is pumped into a gas tank.

Avoided Health Costs

Our reference for avoided health costs was the journal Climatic Change, published by way of Think Progress. The data were developed in a study by Drew Shindell, a professor at Duke University’s Nicholas School of the Environment. It’s worth a read if you have the time as it is more wide-ranging than our use of it here which is to narrowly focus on the impact of gasoline. That impact translates to an additional $3.80 per gallon over the retail price in health and environmental costs. Referencing the Ford Explorer’s burning through 2306 gallons, that works out to avoided health and environmental costs of $8763 for one car driven at this level of mileage over the course of one year.

Police Chief Foti Koskinas (left) and Officer Charles Sampson. Photo courtesy of Westport Police.

Post by Barry Kresch

Tesla Police Vehicle Brings Large Monetary Savings

• The purchase premium is recouped in one year.
• After four years, the savings are enough to pay for another Tesla.
• One EV saves 23.5 tons of CO2 emissions annually.

This blog post will discuss the financial aspects of the analysis. A subsequent post will describe the avoided emissions and health costs.

A Big Splash

Using a Tesla Model 3 for police duty was a new idea back in Dec. 2019 when the Westport Police acquired one for use as a fully customized police cruiser, going into service in Feb. 2020. This was the second Model 3 to be acquired by a police force (Bargersville, IN was the first), but according to the Westport Police, this was the first one to be fully tricked out for law enforcement. The Model S or X would also be cool patrol cars, but the lower price-point of the Model 3 made it a more financially realistic option.

The purchase caused quite a splash, generating hundreds of inquiries from all over the world. Since then, there have been some other communities that have gone the same route. To the best of our knowledge, nobody has published a dive into the financials, including the customization.

The police gave us some very positive feedback early on about using the vehicle. This included how its performance enables it to catch up to a speeding vehicle in less time than a gas-powered patrol car, reducing the danger to other motorists, pedestrians, and the police themselves.

When a police vehicle is out in the community, especially at a public gathering, photo ops are common. The usual photo op is with the kids, who like to be photographed behind the wheel of a patrol car. With this car, it is the adults asking for photos.

At the time the purchase announcement was made, much of the attention was focused on the headline purchase price. Sure, the Tesla Model 3 is green. In fact, it is green even by EV standards with a 121 MPGe EPA rating. But is it a prudent use of taxpayer funds to purchase a vehicle costing $52,290 compared to $37,000 for a Ford Explorer, the recent mainstay of the Westport patrol car fleet?

This blog reported extensively on the vehicle when it entered service. The story was picked up in other places, too, including local blogger, Dan Woog, who published a story in December 2019 that generated over 50 comments. Most were supportive, but there were doubting Thomases who wrote, “$52,000 – what a joke.” Or “A Tesla is essentially a luxury item and a novelty; what a wasteful and obnoxious mismanagement of our tax dollars.”

While EVs are typically more expensive to acquire than a comparable conventional, or ICE (internal combustion engine) car, the total cost of ownership, which factors in fuel and maintenance, is often lower. This car turned out to be an extreme version of the savings on a total cost of ownership basis.

The Westport Police worked with Sustainable Westport before the purchase to estimate the numbers and there was a high confidence level that the lower operating costs of the Tesla would translate to payback within three years, plus the tantalizing possibility that the native tech in the Tesla would offer savings on the extensive customization that occurs for a law enforcement vehicle. Fortunately, Westport leadership is committed to lowering emissions and they, including First Selectman Jim Marpe and Police Chief Foti Koskinas, had a bias to action.

Fast Recoupment

The new headline is that the payback happens in year one. By year four, there are enough savings to buy a new Tesla. The details get a little more complicated and I will lay them all out. All data regarding the purchase, customization, and operating expenses come from the Westport Police. At my request, the analysis was reviewed by the Finance Department of the Town of Westport, which has confirmed the accuracy of the data and supports the conclusions.

I use actual data, where available, and due to the relatively short time frame, projections based on the data for future years, done in consultation with the police.

This Tesla and The Next

This car was never not going to save money.  The cost of law enforcement customization is substantial, more than the cost of the Ford Explorer. The Tesla, due to its first-mover status, was given significant discounts from the two companies that Westport uses for this work (Whelen Engineering and Fleet Auto Body, which are both CT companies). Going forward, that free lunch is off the menu. Consequently, when discussing the data, I refer to this vehicle as the Tesla “Pilot,” and a second, hypothetical vehicle, as the Tesla “Next,” where I don’t count the one-time discounts to have a better comparison with the Ford ICE.

Also, this comparison assumes outfitting a car from the ground up. In real-life operations, if a vehicle is replaced with a like vehicle, much of the customization can be reused. The Westport patrol fleet is made up of Ford Explorers and Crown Victorias. The latter model has been discontinued so reuse is not possible when replacing those.

The Car

This Model 3 was the long-range, all-wheel drive, performance version. The police did not purchase full-self driving (which their insurer would not underwrite, though it was moot because they weren’t going to buy it anyway).

Customization

The biggest single item in the customization is the license plate reader, and it is here that there was a savings of $10,000 ($8,000 vs $18,000) due to taking advantage of the technology native to the Tesla. As far as Pilot discounts, there was no charge for added cameras, lights, siren, and the weapons rack. These discounts amounted to just over $14,000.

The Pilot was not outfitted with a prisoner transport cage/partition since that was not needed for its duties. For purposes of comparison with the Explorer, the partition was included in the Next vehicle.

There are two items that applied only to the Tesla. One is a spare tire for $800. (The Ford comes with a spare.) The other is a charging station at a cost of $1000 for hardware and installation. These are categorized as “customization” since they come after the vehicle is purchased. The department is getting two shifts per day on a single charge and charging the vehicle overnight. This is assumed to be the usage pattern of future Teslas, so the conservative assumption on charging is that the charging equipment expense will be required for each Tesla procured and it is included in the Next vehicle. There could potentially be a savings opportunity in the future with a dual-port charger.

The other item, charged to all cars, was a police computer.

Exploiting the native Tesla tech is still a work in progress. There is the possibility of future savings but for this comparison, no further savings are assumed. The customization totals for each vehicle are displayed below. The Pilot vehicle, due to the discounts, cost savings from the license plate reader, and lack of a prisoner partition has a $24,600 lower cost of customization. In other words, based on the customization alone, the purchase premium has been more than recouped. The Next vehicle, without all the discounts, still has a lower customization cost than the Ford in the amount of $8200 due to the license plate reader savings, partially offset by the charging station and spare tire expenses.

One thing that Tesla did was enable the wiring of all the electronic accessories (lights, siren, etc.) into the large battery. That made it unnecessary to add a second 12-volt battery (which is how other police departments have handled this item). In the case of the Ford patrol car, a heavy-duty alternator is how the extra load is handled. (The HD alternator is included in the base purchase price of the Ford.)

Ongoing Costs

Aside from fuel, these are the ongoing regular maintenance items that are included in the data.

Both vehicles: brakes and tires.

With electric vehicles, regenerative braking, where the engine slows the car and stores some of that kinetic energy in the battery (instead of its being dissipated as heat), greatly reduces the wear on the brakes. The scheduled brake servicing for the Tesla is once every two years. It is possible the brakes will last longer, but the police use involves hard stops, which will engage the friction brakes, and this is thought to be a conservative estimate. Brake servicing history on the Explorer is twice per year.

The police have remarked that they are pleasantly surprised that the tires are holding up better on the Tesla, which they attribute to a superior suspension. I was surprised, too. Normally, tires are the one area where an EV does not save money. Most EVs use low rolling resistance tires. These maximize range but are not known for long life. In the case of the Westport PD, they are using the same tire for both the Ford and the Tesla. It is possible there was a slight range-loss because of this. They plan to replace the Tesla tires once every two years, compared to every year for the Ford.

Ford only: oil/filter changes, transmission servicing, catalytic converter, water pump, spark plugs, alternator.

The costs were calculated based on driving 23,060 miles in a year.

The EV charger that was installed by the police is not sub-metered. Tracking electricity consumption was a manual affair of tracking mileage and battery state of charge before and after each day. Going forward, the police have subscribed to Tesla-Fi, so there will be an opportunity to tighten those numbers, plus track battery degradation. Based on the data we have, the cost of electricity was 60% less than it was for gas. Also, keep in mind that this car is a 2020 model year, meaning it was before Tesla began installing heat pumps in its vehicles. This will reduce energy consumption in cold weather. Finally, there is a new EV Rate Design currently being adjudicated by the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority. This has the potential to reduce the cost per kilowatt hour of electricity, depending upon the final rulemaking, how it applies to municipalities, and whether the police could live with a managed charging arrangement. The police would have to install smart chargers, which are more expensive than the dumb charger they have now, but that cost differential would likely be subsidized in this scenario.

The chart below maps the savings from fuel and maintenance on a year by year cumulative basis for 4 years. Bands of color represent items in a consistent way across all 4 panels and all 3 bars and are identified in the legend. In year one, there is already a savings of $8.3 thousand, due to the lower fuel costs for the Tesla, along with the cost of quarterly oil/filter changes, brake servicing, and tire replacement for the Ford. From there, the savings accrue even more quickly due to ICE parts (e.g. the catalytic converter) needing to be replaced, so that by the time we get to 4 years, the savings total $31.5 thousand. This is considerably more than the purchase premium and almost as much as the purchase cost of the Ford.

Service Life

The documented service life of the Ford Explorers is four years. Based on what the police have seen to date, they are planning for a six-year service life for the Model 3. This is big. Costs are calculated on both a cash and amortized basis.

Total Costs – Cash Basis

The chart below shows the total cost of each vehicle with subtotals by category (purchase, customization, ongoing) for each of 4 years. This looks at the costs on a cash basis. The costs are cumulative. Since we are looking at the costs on a cash basis, the 2 blue bands, representing the purchase and customization costs, recognize these expenses in the first year and they don’t change. The ongoing cost does increase each year as more fuel is used and additional maintenance items are performed.  The maintenance load on the Ford, in particular, gets heavier as the years go by and things like the catalytic converter and water pump need to be replaced. Therefore, the year 4 cost is the total spent on fuel and maintenance to this point. Four years is the chosen interval as it corresponds to the service life of the Ford Explorer.

This next chart summarizes the categories into a grand total and displays the 4-year cost trend for each vehicle. This is still on a cash basis and it ties to the totals in the category chart above.

Total Costs – Amortized Basis

None of the charts to this point have taken service life into account. It should be noted that even on a cash basis, the costs for the Teslas are considerably lower. The chart below reprises the category format, except that the purchase and customization costs are divided by the number of years in the service life of each vehicle. This is why the fixed costs increment upwards each year.

This is what the total costs for each vehicle for each year look like. The magnitude of the difference between the Teslas and the Ford Explorer is greater because, after 4 years, only two-thirds of the Tesla purchase and customization costs are amortized. You will notice that year 4 of the costs for the Ford is the same is it appears 2 charts above, because at that point, the vehicle has been fully amortized.

You can easily see the differences are substantial and we have done the math on the savings for you in the two charts below. The first shows the savings for the Tesla Pilot and the second shows the savings for the Tesla Next. Each chart displays side by side the savings on a cash and amortized basis.

As can be seen, the extraordinary discounts for the Pilot vehicle generate an enormous savings of $63,000 after four years on an amortized basis. But even the Next vehicle more garners significant savings even on a cash basis. On an amortized basis, the $52,000 savings are almost the exact cost of the original purchase price of the Model 3.

The bottom line: This is good for the bottom line!

Closing Note: The police buying a Tesla, was a toe in the water, a pilot. As demonstrated in the data, the payback happens in the first year and the savings are substantial after 4 years. The ramification is very clear:  It is possible to move aggressively to replace every ICE vehicle that turns over with an appropriate EV without jeopardizing constrained financial resources. It’s not just about Tesla. The Town of Westport recently acquired 2 Chevy Bolts. The police have several other plug-in vehicles such as the Toyota Prius Primes that are used for parking enforcement. It is about reducing emissions while cost-effectively matching the vehicle to the use case. The potential is there to save millions of tons of emissions and millions of dollars over the course of 10 or 15 years.

Even better news is that future savings could be greater. In the case of the Tesla, making greater use of the native technology is still a work in progress. There could be more savings, but since we don’t have anything definitive, I didn’t want to be overly speculative.

Something new that is happening is the new EV Rate Design issued by the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority.

Even though the final adjudication was issued on July 14th, there are still working groups filling in the details. We should know everything at some point in Q4. The program takes effect in January 2022. But we do know that it includes subsidies for charging station purchases, make ready, and discounted electric rates.

So I will close by borrowing a Tesla term and say there is no reason not to move forward in Ludicrous Mode.

This is a recent video that was made with the Westport Chief of Police, Foti Koskinas, at an outdoor press conference where he was speaking about the first year of the vehicle being in service.

Inquiries can be sent to EVClubCT@gmail.com

Rebates Spike in March, but Program Still Underspent

Rebates awarded under the state EV purchase-incentive program spiked to 151 in March, double that of the (slightly restated) number of 75 for February. This was part of the standard monthly update by DEEP.

There were increases across the board, which could be reflective of the economic recovery, but certainly, something to watch.

The most rebates again went to the Toyota Prius Prime with 33, up from 22 in February. This was followed by the Tesla Model 3 with 31, up from 2. The Model 3, as we’ve seen before, is volatile since only the base trim level is eligible. The only other vehicle to hit at least 20 was the Chevy Bolt at exactly that number. Most of them were the 2020 Bolts which GM has been heavily discounting.

The other vehicles in double digits were the Toyota RAV4 Prime (18), Hyundai Kona (15), Nissan Leaf Plus (11), Tesla Model Y (10). The Leaf Plus is the longer-range Leaf. The appearance of the Model Y is ephemeral as the standard range option is no longer being made available by Tesla. That may change, but we have no information on whether that will definitively happen or what the timing may be.

There is still no word on the implementation of the new CHEAPR program with higher rebate levels and new, income-limited incentives. We have been advised that the board has not been able to sync schedules for a meeting to review the new material, nor do we know if the consultant has finished with the software development. We asked DEEP if they could give us a rough estimate, but have not received a response.

Spend Level Remains Low

It has been our expectation that the program would underspend again in 2021 and that was when we expected the new program might be live by early April. After 1 quarter, the spend is $310,500 against a statutory pace budget of $750,000, and an actual pace budget (including the rollover of unspent 2020 funds) of $1,300,000.