Post #1833: Used EV rethink


I’m about a week into trying to buy a used EV.  I’m typically working from the listings provided by Edmunds.com, for a 25-mile radius around my ZIP code, here in Vienna VA.

It has been an education. 

Good news is, I haven’t spent any money yet.  Bad news is, I’m not sure I’m any closer to getting a used EV.

Maybe a change of focus is in order.

As of this last round, my best candidate is a two-year-old Chevy Bolt, with 20K miles on it, for a net $16K. 

 


First stop:  Used EVs, $10K and under.  What did I learn?

1:  The Leaf dominates this market segment.  By that I mean, most of the vehicles for sale are used Leafs, 2011-2016 models.  Never saw a 2017 listed.  And, on paper, the Leaf SV has better specs than the common alternatives in this market segment (Chevy Spark, Smart for Two, and Ford Focus).

2:  A used Leaf will tell you how much range it has lost, right on the “gas gauge”.   The same gauge will give you a snapshot of the range, subject to a lot of random variation.  But the bottom line is that if the seller posted a picture of the dash, showing that gauge, you can immediately weed out the ones with a lot of range loss.  I went through this in detail in recent posts on this topic.

3:  That’s handy, because the “Recharge.com” estimates of battery range provided in used car ads can be wildly inaccurate.  I got interested in a car because it had a Recharge.com range of about 110 miles.  Until I saw a picture of the dashboard, and found that the actual range was closer to 60 miles.

4: There’s a real “market for lemons” aspect to the used EV market.   By that I mean that used Leafs offered for sale around here had experienced an average of 8 percent per year range loss.  That’s about twice the typical range loss for this make/model/age.

Not that the used gas car market doesn’t suffer from the same thing.  But here, you can quantify the degree of adverse selection with a single, objective number.

Two things brought my search in this market area to a screeching halt.

5:  The best range I could find, on a used Leaf in that market segment, was 60-ish miles.  And upon reflection, that doesn’t really cut it if you want an all-season, all-Metro-area car, that will last you some years.  Highway travel reduces range.  Cold (and for the Leaf) warm temperatures reduce range.  The Leaf uses an obsolete CHAdeMO fast-charging plug that will become increasingly hard to find as time passes.  And that range is going to continue to degrade.

I could  see myself owning a car that I would hesitate to take half-way around the DC beltway, in the winter.  At which point, it’s no longer a fully-functional car, and has started the slow slide to becoming a glorified neighborhood electric vehicle.

6:  But the biggest problem is that some Leafs get temperamental as they age.  After reading enough accounts, it’s pretty clear that some well-used Leafs  can no longer deal with high-power/high-current-flow events, such as highway speeds, long uphills, or regenerative braking.  For those, you have to “baby” the vehicle, and otherwise live within its limitations.  Understand, this is for a car in excellent repair.  It’s not something that’s fixable, short of replacing the battery pack.

In hindsight, I see hints that other used EVs suffer from the same current-limiting issue as they age.  I suspect the extreme examples I found in older Leafs are due to the small battery pack.  Cars with larger initial range (e.g., Tesla) seem to manifest the same issue as a pronounced “loss of oomph”, rather than a car that will shut down if you push it too hard.

 


A new focus:  New EV under $30K?

Near as I can tell, in this market segment, by MSRP, you’ve got the Chevy Bolt, and the Nissan Leaf.  Both cars are about the same size, and both cars are about the size and weight of a Prius Prime.  So I suspect I’d be comfortable driving either one.

Source:  Fueleconomy.gov

Of these, on paper, the Chevy Bolt appears to be a much better choice.  First, the Bolt has a much higher range (~260 miles) than the Nissan Leaf in this price range (~150 miles).  (You can get a Leaf with more range, but it costs another $8K or so.)  Second, the Bolt has the modern CCS fast-charging socket, while the Leaf retains the obsolete CHAdeMO plug.  Third, the Bolt has (I think) a battery temperature management system, while the Leaf (I think) remains passively cooled (which a certain E. Musk described, circa 2010, as “crude”).

All together, this makes the 150-mile Leaf close to unusable for long-distance driving, certainly in summer.  Charging heats the battery.  The car responds by slowing the rate of charge.  Apparently, a mid-summer highway trip in a Leaf is just an excruciating experience.  This, per a YouTube presentation of a West Virginia Leaf owner who filmed his three-day trip from West Virginia to Florida.

Whereas the Bolt, in theory, would get me from Vienna VA to (e.g.) Ocean City Maryland (174 miles) without a recharge.  Not possible in the Leaf.  Per the diagram below, the Leaf’s one-way range limit is just slightly larger than the Bolt’s round-trip range limit.

There are other functional differences.  For example, the Bolt only has resistance electric heating, not the more-efficient heat pump that can be had on the Leaf.

But the Bolt has two big problems.

Fire.

The first problem with the Bolt is its checkered history.  GM ended up recalling every Bolt ever made, 2017-2022. 

There were … not battery fires, per se, but fires in the high-voltage battery compartment.   (A lithium-ion battery fire is all-but-impossible to put out.  Once that starts to burn, the car (and whatever the car is parked in) is toast.  These were events that charred some of the interior, so, for sure, it wasn’t the Li-ion battery that outright caught fire.  But the batter was the source of the heat that charred the battery compartment.)

Per the NHTSA, there were two fires out of a population of 78,000 cars, up to 2020.  Three more such fires occurred after 2020, out of a larger population of vehicles.  In the end, GM recalled all of those (2017 to 2022).

Reading further across several sources, the problem arose in cars with bad battery modules, where the owners charged the car to 100%.  GM’s interim guidance was, in effect, don’t do that.  Don’t charge to 100% (and don’t run the battery down to zero).  Initially, GM agreed to replace all of those batteries, then they backtracked, and offered a software fix to monitor for the presence of those defective modules.  Basically, they modified the software so that the car’s software would raise a red flag if that car had one of the “bad” batteries.

FWIW, the used-car market appears unconcerned, as those Bolts sell on a par with the lower-range Leafs.  Here’s my crude summary, below.  With either car, accounting for the different tax credits for new and used cars, buying a two-year-old Bolt or a two-year-old Leaf would only save about $4500 off the new car MSRP.  (But see below, there are no Bolts available new MSRP).

FWIW, there appears to have been has only been one known Leaf battery fire in the U.S. in the entire history of the car.

That said, I’m not too concerned about the fire risk.  First, I avoid charging Li-ion batteries to 100%, because it shortens their life.  Two, this will be housed on an ancient detached garage, so if it burns, it’s not going to take my house with it.

Bolt:  Unobtainium near MSRP

Just to be sure I’m not hallucinating, this is what Chevy says:

Near as I can tell, those prices are a complete fiction.  At least in this area.

I don’t know whether my local Chevy dealers have figured out a way to collude on prices or not, but every one, in my area, has chosen to mark the up the Bolt by roughly the same amount, about $6000 over MSRP.

What a coincidence.

There’s one dealer within 250 miles that claims to have one, at a more reasonable markup over MSRP.  But upon investigation, that’s vaporware.  They’ve ordered one from Chevy and are pre-advertising it.

There’s a second dealer that claims to offer some at just over MSRP.  But upon inspection, that’s the price after you’ve paid them roughly a $5000 down-payment.

In short, the lowest actual asking price for the base-model Bolt, that I have run across, within a roughly 500-mile radius of my home, is about $33K.  Which translates to $25,500 after Federal tax credit.  Plus the usual fees, taxes, and so on.

The rest of the low-end new market.

To put a cap on it, per Tesla, today, the cheapest model available in my area is a Model 3 for $51K, with a range of just over 300 miles.

To put a floor on it, based on the cheapest hybrid:  A new Toyota Corolla hybrid gets 50 MPG (per EPA) and can be had around here for $25K asking price.  Buying that car, instead of an EV, would add about 0.4 tons C02 to my annual carbon footprint, assuming 3000 miles a year, and assuming Virginia’s electrical generation averages 0.65 pounds C02/KWH.  Around here, a new Toyota Prius looks like it’s almost unobtainable for anything near MSRP.  I’d probably be looking at $36K to buy a new Prius in this area.  At the very bottom end of new-car prices, a new Nissan Versa can be hand for $18K, and gets about 35 MPG.

What is the middle door for?  Only she knows.

Lightly used EV?  Leaf is a poor value.  Used Bolt avoids the current new-car-dealer surcharge.

For the Leaf S, if I were willing to roll the dice on a two-year-old used car with 20K miles, I could save a whopping $4.5K.  That small savings is due in part to the different tax credits for new ($7500) and used (up to $4000) cars.

For the Bolt, the used market appears to avoid the current high dealer markups on new Bolts.  There, under the same conditions (two years old, maybe 20K miles), I would save more like $10K, relative to actual current new Bolt asking prices.  I don’t know whether that reflects the fact that these cars were recalled.  But as far as I know, the 2023 is no different from the 2021, it’s just that GM installed the new software from the get-go.


To summarize

I’m making progress.  I think.

Looks like a new or lightly used Chevy Bolt is the sweet spot, so far, for me.

There’s probably nothing in the $10K-and-under used EV market that I want.  All the cars in that segment started out with small battery packs.  I believe that, as the car ages, those small batteries make the car sensitive to even a few weak battery modules.  There’s too high a chance that now, or in a few years, I’ll end up with a temperamental vehicle that can’t be trusted to do normal all-around driving.

The only new EV available for under $30K asking price, around here, is the Nissan Leaf S.  That has some known drawbacks (no battery cooling, obsolete fast-charging port), and apparently is really not practical for any sort of summertime road trip, due to the extreme charge times with a hot battery.

A Chevy Bolt, with the current ridiculous dealer markup, but after the Federal tax credit, costs about the same as the cheapest new hybrid cars.   For example, it’s about the same as the base model Toyota Corolla, which gets 50 MPG EPA.  So, in the sense of avoiding carbon footprint, it costs me nothing to choose the Bolt over a new hybrid.

(Not shown, there’s also the Ford Maverick hybrid truck which would, in theory, cost about that much.  But those are also more-or-less unobtainable at reasonable markup in my area.  Those get 37 MPG, and have all the the functionality of a pickup truck.)

Cheaper than that, and the only available new cars are non-hybrids, with what appears to be a maximum gas mileage of around 35 MPG.  Of which the Nissan Versa is an example.  But now, still in the early stages of our global warming disaster, I’d say that the last thing I want to do is cause yet another straight-gas car to be created. 

The upshot is that if I refuse to buy anything less efficient that a hybrid, I might as well get a Bolt EV.  With the tax credit, the Bolt costs about the same as the cheapest hybrid.

And then, the question is whether I want to save maybe $10K by gambling on a two-year-old used Bolt.

Go up another $10K to $15K, and you have your choice of new EVs.  But just as a matter of taste, I find none of them to be any more appealing than the Bolt.  Some are modestly larger.  Some have (I guess) more prestigious names than Chevy.  None materially exceeds the range of the bolt, until you hit the $50K bottom-end Tesla.

Das Bolt von Barbie, only available in Germany.

The Bolt is a risk, due to a history of rare battery overheating during full charge.  In theory, GM addressed that.  In practice, you aren’t going to know for sure.  Certainly, the market has not shied away from the Bolt.  Even used Bolts are pretty fully-priced.  And I don’t think GM fixed the issue at any basic level, they just installed the newer software on the new Bolts at the factory.

Post #1832B: A footnote on car battery recycling

 

Aside from what I discussed in the just-prior post, my other hesitation in buying a used EV is the eventual need to junk it.  In particular, to get the batteries recycled.

Everybody seems to say, pish-tosh, by the time you’re at that stage, it’ll be easy.  Cheap.  Why, they’ll pay you good money for your clapped-out EV battery.

Me, I’m not so sure.

In the course of researching the just-prior post, I came across this:

Source:  Teslarati

Last I checked, Tesla was only recycling Tesla batteries.  That’s because at this point, it costs quite a bit to recycle a lithium-ion battery.  That’s laid out in Post #1712, The Balkanization of the EV battery recycling market.

So, do the math.  A typical Tesla battery pack is around 1500 pounds.  A metric ton is about 2200 pounds.  So that new factory, hitting this new recycling milestone, is capable of handling (52 x 100 x 2200 / 1500 =~ ) 7,500 dead Tesla battery packs, per year. 

Tesla is selling how many cars, in the U.S., now.  Oh, like half-a-million in 2022, and an even higher rate in 2023.  So, at present, Tesla — which is ahead of the game, as far as I can tell — is set up to recycle … ah, call it 1.5% of the car batteries it is currently producing.

And if you read that article in depth, some of what they are doing is short of actual recycling.  They are “stockpiling for future processing of any materials generated that cannot be immediately processed.”

Sure, you read about the one-off project here and there, where old car batteries are recycled into power walls, or storage for the grid, or whatnot.  And maybe there are areas of the country where such things are so prevalent that people will buy your dead EV batteries.

But around here, near as I can tell, if I want to get rid of a big Li-ion car battery, I’m going to have to pay for the privilege.   And I just have the feeling that EV Li-ion battery recycling, at the same scale as current battery production, is just a bomb waiting to explode.

Post #1832: Loss of performance with aging.

 

Finally, a topic every man can relate to.

I had been under the impression that as an EV ages, it ages gracefully.  It might slowly lose range, for sure, but otherwise, it was the same vehicle it always was.  I didn’t read a lot of chatter about them losing capability, or reliability, as they age.  So the story seems to be that EVs simply age into being reliable used cars, with more limited range than when new.

Maybe that’s true.  Maybe that’s sometimes true.  Maybe that’s true except for the bottom-of-the-market segment that I’m currently shopping.  Maybe that’s pro-EV propaganda.

To cut to the chase:  Size matters.  That’s my conclusion, at any rate.  All other things equal, performance and reliability issues should show up soonest in EVs with the smallest range.  That’s because, for any given maneuver on the road, those EVs draw more power per unit of battery capacity.  Unreliability shows up first during events that use (or produce) a lot of power.

Continue reading Post #1832: Loss of performance with aging.

Post #1830A: Leaf extras-for-stat-nerds

 

The statistically savvy among you might have noticed something odd about the graph at the end of the last post.

When I let unconstrained math (via Excel) determine the best straight-line fit to these data points, it appears to tell me that these cars lost about 4% of battery capacity for every 10K miles.

But …

But what that doesn’t do is guarantee that with zero miles, I predict that you’ll have 100% of original capacity.

And that matters, because it looks like a lot of these cars must have lost a lot of range early on, that is, at low mileage.  And that loss of battery range doesn’t get factored into the 4% per 10K range loss estimate.

So this is a rare instance of a straight-line fit for which you are justified in “setting the intercept” manually, rather than letting an unconstrained least-squares fit to the data do it.  By definition, the line has to pass through zero miles matching 100% of original range.

Look what happens when I do that:

On average, pinning the linear trend to pass through 0 miles = 100% of original range, range loss is more like 8% per 10K miles. 

The whole cluster of dots is quite “low” on that graph, so to speak.  Those cars on average followed a path of losing a lot of range early on.  And having the loss taper off to a mere 4% per year.

My guess is that exponential decay is the line you’d like to fit, for something wasting away.  But I can’t seem to get Excel to give a trend passing through the required point, with the required shape.  So I freehanded what I think the Conventional Wisdom says about the time-path of battery loss.

No matter how you cut it, the actual observed battery loss over this range amounts to much more than 4%/10K miles.  The mid-point of the fitted line sits around a 40% loss over 5K miles.  That’s the 8%/year calculated when the regression line was pinned at 100% capacity at zero miles.


Why the high range losses?  Is this just a market for lemons, or are the dashboard estimates biased?

George Akerlof, economist, once wrote a piece whose title began “The Market for ‘Lemons’: ”  The paper is pretty deep, but the takeaway is pretty simple.  In this case, it boils down to: People sell their cars when those cars are lemons, not when they are peaches.

That’s one obvious explanation of why these losses appear far larger-than-expected.  (Where, lurking in the background is the idea that EVs lose, oh, like two percent a year, maybe, based on looking at a few graphs in the past.)  The point is, maybe most of these cars appear in the used car listings precisely because they had above-average battery capacity losses.  And that’s why their prior owners sold them.  And I’m seeing them.

The other possibility is that the mileage estimated from the dashboard readout is substantially biased downwards.  (I know it has a high variance, as it depends on recent driving style.  Leaf aficionados refer to it as the “guess gauge”.  That should just add noise, not bias, I think.)

There is one element of bias in what I did in my calculation, in that the range bars are each about 8 percent thick.  For example, when I saw four range bars, my calculation assumed the car was (4/12 =) 33% charged.  But if four bars is really just 3.5 bars, on average, then that charge level is actually just a shade over 28%, on average.  I would then triple that error in arriving at 100% of charge, and so end up understating total range by a factor of about 15%.

Adjusting for that  would require multiplying my range estimate by (1/.85 =) about 18%.  The upshot is that what looked like a 60-mile range based on the dashboard could plausibly be a 70-mile range in reality.

That said, I’m not sure this materially changes the situation.  No matter how I slice it, the range of the car I’m interested is far lower than the Recurrent.com estimate that I had been looking at.

Finally, I can’t fully discount that the losses observed in this low-end used car sample are typical of a random sample of Leafs.  But if it were, I doubt there’d be many Leaf fans out there.

On net, I think the explanation is that I’m looking at a market for lemons.  By looking only at the low-cost end of the market, and only looking at what people are trying to sell, I’m probably looking at a fairly biased sample of all Leafs.

Unfortunately, that’s the sample of cars I’m buying from, if I continue down this path.  Perhaps time for a re-think.

Post #1828: Factors affecting the price of a used Nissan Leaf

 

The single biggest way to save money on a used Nissan Leaf?  Don’t buy from Carvana.

That’s what the data say.  Other results are in the RESULTS section below.


Hedonic price function

I didn’t make up the term.  A hedonic price function is the method economists use to parse out the factors that contribute to the market value of an object.

Basically, you take what everybody knows — newer cars cost more, high-mileage cars cost less — and you quantify it.  You calculate a data-based estimate of just how much those factors affect the price of the object in question.

Probably the single most important use of this approach is in the U.S. Consumer Price Index.  That index is no longer a simple average of observed prices for various goods.  That’s because the qualities of the underlying goods keep changing.  Take computers for example.  A new PC is typically far more capable than a ten-year-old PC.  If you simply lump those two together as “PCs”, you ignore the increase in the value of what the consumer is buying.  So, the Bureau of Labor Statistics uses hedonic price estimates to determine how much “better” newer models are, compared to older models, and adjusts the prices of newer models (down) accordingly.  The other way to look at that is that this is how Uncle Sam systematically understates the true rate of inflation.  And, accordingly, saves money on all of its payments linked to inflation, such as Social Security payments.

Practically speaking, I “ran a regression”.  Which is, at root, just an average.  Instead of taking a simple average price, it’s an adjusted average.  It adjusts the average asking price for the factors that you have identified (e.g., age, mileage). 

The nice thing about it is that it gives you the independent effect of each factor.  So, newer used cars also tend to be lower-mileage used cars.  To what extent is their higher price for late-model cars due to low age, versus low mileage?  In theory, a regression parses that out for you.

Regressions, much like the Magic 8 Ball from which they were derived, sometimes give you a non-committal answer.  By that I mean that there’s so little systematic impact of some factor that you can’t really say whether or not you’re just picking up random associations.  The ones above that are egregiously so, I’ve put in faint gray type.  You should ignore any estimates that don’t pass a standard hurdle for “statistical significance” this way.

(I hope it goes without saying that regressions may sometimes give a wrong answer, and may sometimes give a right answer.  Again, much like the Magic 8 Ball.)


Results

By far, the most important factor for saving money on a used Leaf is not to buy it from Carvana Averaged across all the cars in the dataset, buying from Carvana added $3K to the price of the car.  I don’t think that’s news, as I vaguely recall that they had a reputation for being a convenient-but-relatively-costly source for used cars.

But just as interesting are the things that don’t matter.

The trim level or options level had no (statistically significant) effect on the price This, I think, also matches conventional wisdom.  As stated by my mother-in-law: Buy a loaded car because you want to drive a loaded car.  Don’t buy it for the additional resale value, because there isn’t any.  (But keep in mind, the effect of difference in range is accounted for elsewhere, and so differences in battery capacity across trim lines should not, in theory, contribute to the pure effect of the trim level.)

Curiously, history of having been in an accident also did not much matter.  I have no explanation for that, except that maybe most of those aren’t major accidents?

Now we get to the big three:  Year, Mileage, and Range.  To interpret these, you need to know that the average asking price in this dataset was about $15,000.

All other things equal, each year that a used Leaf ages, as a used car, it loses about $900 in value, or about 6% of its value.  See the note below on comparing this to the depreciation of a brand-new Leaf.  It’s lower, but not vastly lower, than the depreciation of a new car.  I think this matches our received folklore about car values.  The fastest reduction in value that you will experience is in the moment you drive your new car off the dealer’s lot.

Mileage hardly matters. Every additional 10K miles on the odometer only drops the value of the car by about $200, or just over 1%.  I think that’s quite  different from what you see with gas cars, and speaks to the robustness of the motors and drive train.  It appears that the typical buyer isn’t concerned with expensive repairs for a fairly high-mileage used Leaf.

Alternatively, these cars may simply have such low average miles, that mileage had not yet begun to matter.  Median mileage was just 36K, median age was about five years.  The low average mileage is a function of both low car age and few miles per year, consistent with a car in which long-distance travel was likely awkward for most.)

Slice that either way you like.  The fact is, odometer miles didn’t much matter.

Oddly, battery range only matters a bit.  This analysis was restricted to models that had an estimate of the actual remaining range, via some remote monitoring service that tests battery life.  Every 10 miles of additional battery range was only worth about $430, or maybe 3%.   I’m guessing that people interested in a used Leaf are probably coming from the same place that I am, in that they plan to use it as a “city car”.  So extra range is nice, but not a deal-breaker, as long as it’ll get you around town for the next few years.

I’m not sure the same would hold true for the price of a new EV, where the typical buyer may want to be able to take long trips in the car.  There, I’d expect to see a higher value on longer range.


Final takeaways.

First, I’m not going to buy from Carvana.  As if I ever were.

Second, on paper, as new cars, Leafs appear to have suffered from shockingly steep depreciation.  So much so that it gave me pause.  How could a car that lost value that quickly be a good buy as a used car?

But I think that’s largely an artifact of the (then) $7500 tax credit.  A person buying a $32500 Leaf actually only paid $25,000 for it, net of the tax credit.  If I factor the tax credit in, depreciation on a new Leaf that appeared to be in excess of 12%/year falls to a far more reasonable 8% per year.  Or just modestly higher than the rate of depreciation shown among the sample of used Leafs.

Third, at the price range I’m considering (~$10K), it probably won’t cost me much to buy the model with the bigger battery/higher range (SV) instead of the base model (S, SL).  The additional 30 miles of range (100 vs 70) ought to cost me just over an additional $1200.  And that additional range should be cheap insurance against the future degradation of the lithium-ion battery.

Finally, as long as the battery is in good shape, I probably shouldn’t worry too much about the mileage.  Or, at least, that’s what the market is telling me.  Buyers seemed to be almost indifferent to the miles on the odometer.  To me, that crowd-sources the conclusion that, battery aside, these cars don’t tend to wear out within the range of mileages typically found for used Leafs.

Epilogue

A wise philospher once said, “You cannot step into the same used-car query twice.”  I thought about adding more information (e.g., Carmax as seller).  But I “keypunched” the cars in the order they showed when I ran my first query.  To get back to those Edmunds.com search results, I’d have to re-run that query.  That could easily give me a slightly different set of cars, depending.  Which means the existing dataset might not synch up with the new data, as punched.  Not without extraordinary measures.

In this case, the juice is not worth the squeeze.  I’ll let this be the end of it.

Post #1827: Abrupt climate change. Here’s hoping that comes sooner rather than later.

 

“Shukhov went to sleep fully content. He’d had many strokes of luck that day: they hadn’t put him in the cells; they hadn’t sent his squad to the settlement; he’d swiped a bowl of kasha at dinner; the squad leader had fixed the rates well; he’d built a wall and enjoyed doing it; he’d smuggled that bit of hacksaw blade through; he’d earned a favor from Tsezar that evening; he’d bought that tobacco. And he hadn’t fallen ill. He’d got over it.

A day without a dark cloud. Almost a happy day.”

From: One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

(Art for this post was draw by Gencraft.com AI, prompts were variations on boiling a frog.)

Continue reading Post #1827: Abrupt climate change. Here’s hoping that comes sooner rather than later.

Post 1826: Used Leaf versus remaining alternatives

 

I’m still working on getting something to replace the car I got rid of a year ago.  For use around town, when it’s inconvenient to borrow my wife’s car.

Bottom line:  By the process of calculatus eliminatus, my best and most realistic option is a well-used Nissan Leaf.  The 30% Federal tax rebate, on the purchase price of this qualifying used EV, is just gravy.

Beyond the items already discussed and dismissed (e-bike, e-motorcycle), the remaining options for local transport in my area seem to be:

  • Used Nissan Leaf
  • Uber or similar
  • Public transportation

In a nutshell, near as I can figure:

  • Used Leaf, convenient, $0.55/mile.
  • Uber, just about as convenient, $4/mile.
  • Public transport, inconvenient, not great in all weather, $1/mile.

Continue reading Post 1826: Used Leaf versus remaining alternatives