Electric cars losing value twice as fast as petrol vehicles – drivers may lose £25,000
By Paul Homewood
From the Express:
The value of some of the most popular electric cars is depreciating at twice the rate of petrol cars, a new study has found.
When someone buys a new car, the value will naturally decrease over time given the wear and tear of the vehicle, as well as the mileage and age. But, for some electric car owners, they could be seeing the value of their car depreciate at twice the rate of petrol cars.
According to a new study, EVs on average will lose 51 percent of their purchase value from 2020 to 2023, compared to just 37 percent for petrol vehicles.
This equates to a massive £15,220 loss for electric car owners, with petrol drivers seeing a decrease of £9,901.
The data, from ChooseMyCar.com, used a comparison of new car prices three years ago compared to their value now.
The higher the original purchase price of the car, the bigger the loss, with the Tesla Model S losing £25,000 in value in just three years – a 46 percent drop.
However, entry-level EVs like the Nissan Leaf are also losing a massive amount of value in such a short space of time.
The Leaf’s value dropped by £13,000 – or 58 percent – despite it being one of the most popular small EVs on the market.
https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/cars/1765530/electric-cars-petrol-value
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
This is entirely logical. The major component is the battery which has a relatively short life-ca.8 years. An ICE can last 20+ years with sound maintenance. My current diesel is almost 18 years (290k km) and has years of life ahead.
Only rich people buy the EV toys but they have proper cars as well
I’d say they’re mostly company cars, rented under salary sacrifice schemes.
A fool and his money are soon parted.
” An ICE can last 20+ years ” I have an ICE that is 68 years old, 100+mpg, minimal use of tarmac, minimal wear of tarmac, minimal use of tyres, minimal spares required.
Be careful how far you spread this story, the Government will come up with a Subsidy to solve their problem.
Another good reason is that a replacement battery after, say, 70K miles, will cost more than the car is worth-apart from lack of charging points-lack of range especially in winter with heating and headlights on-itâs madness. OK for poodling around town but thatâs all.
Even if there were a charging point every single mile, it still doesn’t fix the fundamental problem that EVs need recharging more often than refilling with petrol and diesel and each of those EV recharges takes much longer than maximum ten minutes to refill an ICE.
>>lack of charging points-lack of range
EVs should have guaranteed range by using figures relating to its use in most unfavourable conditions and all accessories in use.
A minimum range in effect as opposed to the ‘up to’ they claim on the the TV adverts which is unlikely to ever be achieved. The test method would have to be standardised so you can compare. Normal cars go through a standard test to give a comparison across models. The ignorant media articles about vehicles not matching this in normal use fail to understand the point of the test but then when has the media in recent times shown any competence. They still think a tank is any tracked vehicle painted green/brown.
Economics, it is really a fairly simple concept. Just supply and demand, low demand equals low price, high demand equals high price….no one wants second hand BEVs, so low price. Get used to it.
That’s only part of it. New ones come with big subsidies; used ones don’t.
Almost, but very few people want even a brand new EV, yet they have high prices and are simultaneously LESS practical.
Is this a new law of economics / marketing concept? Make a product that is inferior to what already exists and charge a higher price?
>>Economics, it is really a fairly simple concept. Just supply and demand, low demand equals low price, high demand equals high price….no one wants second hand BEVs, so low price. Get used to it.
Veblen goods, my dear Watson.
The problem for battery cars is that they contain much higher amounts of high cost materials that will get more expensive with greater demand so there is no chance of economies of scale that ignorant people – politicians, journalists, ecofascists – say will happen. Recycling of lithium is non-existent in the UK and is expensive – probably because it is energy intensive and Nut Job zero policies have made energy more expensive, affecting most recycling.
I have an I C E car which is 96 years old and now worth one hundred times its original cost!
I look at it from a slightly more prosaic pov: knowing how long it’s taken to standardise many computer connections – except power connectors – what happens if some bright spark comes up with an industry standard charging connector – some time after charging stations start to become more prolific? Older EVs start to become even less attractive.
Don’t worry, someone will make an adapter.
The biggest network of charging stations in the US is Tesla’s and they are getting money from the government to make modifications to handle non-Tesla vehicles. They also buy electricity at ~$0.14/KWh and sell it at $0.28/KWh. So there is money to be made. That charge in a Model 3 will give the care 250 miles range for ~$20. The energy to travel per mile with electric will be similar to the cost of gas in a Prius hybrid in the US. But the electric vehicle charged at home will only have to pay $0.14/KWh, saving $10 per charge.
As far as the life of the vehicle, there is a recent article in motor trend went through some of the issues with battery life, https://www.motortrend.com/features/how-long-does-a-tesla-battery-last/. It’s worth a read. Original Model S and X had unlimited warranties on the batter but the Model 3 and Model Y have 100,000 or 120,000 mile warranties. The batter is designed for 200,000 miles. If a person charges their battery home and get’s 1500 charge cycles on the battery (which is actually 300,000 miles) the savings in fuel (vs. a Prius) would be $15,000.
Let me make one other thing clear, I am not an EV owner but I do drive a hybrid (not a Prius). I didn’t make the switch to a hybrid until the price was nearly equivalent to the equivalent standard ICE engine price and there was more than a decade of experience with the technology. Battery technology is a moving target and I likely would not consider a BEV for at least 3 or 4 more years. If I did buy one, I’d pick a system that had demonstrated the durability to run at least 10 years or 150,000 without a battery replacement. If there is one thing that does give me pause about BEV’s but Tesla’s in particular is that they update the operating system of the car periodically and the car often drives differently after the upgrade. And then there are stories where people get locked out or the car’s computer operating system might power down on the highway for no reason. That’s a big reason to wait.
I owned three PRIUS hybrids over the years–perfect car. 50+ MPG Summer, mid 40″s Winter with the heat on in Chicago. Zero range anxiety, high reliability and fun to drive. Never kept one long enough to need a battery pack replacement, as I am not that stupid. Let the next, true-green owner deal with it.
Even with the extortionate TAX on diesel in Europe, that $20 would give a range of more than 250 miles and it only takes maximum ten minutes to refill.
>>That charge in a Model 3 will give the care 250 miles range for ~$20
All of this discussion assume said EVs do not burst into flames while recharging, or end up as insurance totals from a parking lot fender bender. Why do people buy these things? They are expensive, unreliable, rapidly depreciating displays of conspicuous consumption.
Why do people buy these things? They buy them because they believe the pseudo-scientific psychobabble of the western media.
Two thoughts, neither originally mine, come to mind: “There is one born every minute” and “You can’t fix stupid.”
I can see a case for a plug-in hybrid. But a purely battery car sounds daft to me. But here’s another view.
https://mrmoneymustache.com/2023/04/27/why-buy-model-y/
Solar Panels: Are They Really Worth It? 3 May 2023 on Channel 5
Ha, I thought it would be an impartial analysis, nope, just a nudgevert for solar/ batteries and heat pumps.
But they couldn’t hide the £ks of upfront costs.
No probing questions on toxic chemicals, slave labour, cost to grid etc.
They’ve been trying hard to make solar panels worth it by driving up electricity prices. They were worth it when they paid 41p/kWh as a feed in tariff.
It is 65p now!
‘The Leaf’s value dropped by £13,000 – or 58 percent – despite it being one of the most popular small EVs on the market.’
IF true, this is a huge UPGRADE!
Last time Gamecock ran the numbers on the Leaf, it’s 2-year depreciation was 63% !!! CATASTROPHIC depreciation. $30k new; $11k after 2 years.
At the time, I noted that Tesla depreciation was right in line with other premium cars – they carry no depreciation penalty.
As far as ‘being one of the most popular small EVs on the market,’ I don’t buy it. I see several Teslas on the road whenever I go out. I see about one Leaf every half-year. They are virtually invisible around here (in USA. Maybe they have some popularity in Europe).
@ Gamecock, you can check UK asking prices for many cars on “Autotrader”
https://www.autotrader.co.uk/
My view is that the price of secondhand cars in the UK is slowly dropping again after the big spike created by the chip crisis / Covid / profiteering , but the days of bargain secondhand cars have not yet returned.
Our government claim they’re acting in our interests and wish to Save the Planet. However their real objectives are somewhat less noble.
They’re not failing to provide chargers and grid capacity for untold millions of EV’s. The shortfalls aren’t by accident or due to incompetence. It’s deliberate.
They’re not looking to provide cleaner vehicles for millions of people; on the contrary, they’re looking to remove millions of cars from the roads.
Diminished air transport, vehicles, food production (see Netherlands, UK re-wilding) and overall consumption rates are all clearly in their sights.
None of their policies make sense unless viewed from a different objective; not of maintaining the status quo or of improving quality of life, rather one of very deliberately managed decline. Once that is accepted then it all fits perfectly.
I think you have it right, CR
10-4, Mr Red.
Peterson’s Dictum: “If you can’t figure out what someone is doing, or why, look at the outcome. And infer the motivation. If it produces mayhem, perhaps it was aiming at mayhem.”
It is our folly to project our own decency on these people. We should assume they are evil, until proven otherwise.
I agree with the statement, “it is not incompetence” as yes, this is by design. This is all about control of the unwashed by the Party of Davos: They will decide who get to drive and in what. Xi Jinping is rolling on the mat with laughter, watching the Western economies destroy themselves all the while buying his batteries.
Nope, I think it’s straight incompetence, certainly in the U.K.
There is not a single public service that is well run. Look at the numpties in parliament- if they all held hands they couldn’t form a synapse.
Never attribute to conspiracy something which can be adequately explained by incompetence.
The problem with your belief Tinny is that really bad people do really bad things, while they are excused for just being incompetent.
Until you devise a good test for what’s incompetence, you should presume evil. The burden should be on them to prove otherwise.
A government acting in our interests? When did that happen?
When they encouraged the rush to diesel away from petrol,(because of CO2/km emissions) in early 2000’s by offering tax incentives, especially to Company Car drivers.
How did that end ?
And let’s hope they don’t repeat the same mistakes again.
Oh, wait………..
What tax incentives have ever existed for petrol and diesel vehicles?
Only EVs get the subsidies, tax exemptions etc.
>>by offering tax incentives
With problems like this it’s no surprise.
I bought a £100k Tesla Model S and it looks like it was built by a group of toddlers – the quality is unbelievably bad
https://www.thesun.co.uk/motors/22221247/bought-100k-tesla-built-toddlers/
A core problem with Tesla is that it was created by, and is being run by, someone with no manufacturing experience. His genius is in creating a premium, electric car. Not in production of a premium, electric car. Nor in its maintenance. There is no network of dealerships with experienced mechanics . . . it’s all new.
The part no one talks about is Musk is a wholly owned CCP apparatchik, fully captured by Xi Jinping, and bound to turn over all his technology to the Red Chinese. Genius, poser, imposter? It’s all Xi’s to decide.
Battery vehicle production will be slowed down then priced out of the market due to copper supply shortages in the next decade.
This begs the question why continue with the costly and destructive charging infrastructure ?
In 2021, refined copper demand stood at 25.3 million tons, according to the International Copper Study Group.
“The market overall is pretty tight,” said Robert Edwards, copper analyst at CRU. “Longer term there’s a narrative around resource scarcity and the green transition with EVs and renewables as well as the build-out of electricity grids. On paper it’s quite a substantial supply gap opening up over the next 10 years,” he added.
“Copper Shortage Threatens Green Transition” https://www.wsj.com/articles/copper-shortage-threatens-green-transition-620df1e5
Fear not: All these piddling problems will be sorted with the proper application of green, magic, unicorns.
I’m guessing that after the battery dies the value goes to about zero . Or parts value my e.
I think you are wrong. I think there will be enough residual value, at least in their higher lines, to go ahead and pay $20,000 to refresh the battery.
Time will tell.
For an ICE, or at least popular models you can replace an engine with a secondhand one, even from a crash write off or a relatively high mileage MOT failure at low cost and high confidence
You won’t be able to do that with an electric vehicle with any confidence about the longevity of the replacement. If too many fires result it may banned anyway
I actually investigated doing that once, but I couldn’t get the loan approved that would have been repaid in full within six months, yet the banks and other lending institutions DID approve a loan for a much higher amount to buy a used ICE. Go figure.
>>For an ICE, or at least popular models you can replace an engine with a secondhand one
Buying a new car at least every 10 years makes sense, to keep up with new technology, every 2 years for phones. I regret holding on to my last but one car for 18 years, the technology in the new one is a huge improvement.
There won’t be because value is set by affordability. People pay what they can, based on their income and how much they value other things. We can’t suddenly pay a lot more for a car.
Excellent point, Realist. But, remember, people buying top line EVs are financially well off, so they are less likely to need a loan.
Dunno, climarecon. We may have reached peak technology. Some of the tech in the Tesla is just silly.
Riding in my friend’s Model 3, I pointed out to him that his turn signal was still on. He said that there is so much crap displayed on the screen, he doesn’t look at it anymore.
New tech has to do something. For me. Yeah, people buy the latest iPhone because it’s the latest iPhone. I don’t see people buying a new car just to get the newest tech.
My last car purchase was influenced by the availability of MagneRide. But my previous car had it, so it wasn’t like I was going for new technology.
The value goes negative as you will have to pay to dispose of the battery. You might get a few quid for the rest of the car but it depends on the market at the time. I got very lucky disposing of a van because when quoting me £60 via email the breakers forgot to time limit it so when I was ready to get rid of it they wouldn’t have paid me anything.
No surprise here. I wouldn’t touch one with a barge-pole, and neither would anyone else who knew the facts.
I suspect the depreciation isn’t correlated with original price but with the price of the equivalent ICE cars as well – in other words the premium the EV gets new. People pay a premium for a new EV for various reasons in the secind-hand market most of those reasons don’t exist. So a BMW EV will sell for only as much as the equivalent BMW or Audi ICE equivalent. I’m not surprised the Leaf really suffers as there’s plenty of equivalent ICEs from lots of manufacturers and plenty have been sold, so second-hand prices are relatively low.
And that’s before we analyse whether EVs should in fact sell at a discount for range, battery damage etc reasons.
Exactly!
The economic benefits of a used EV versus the equivalent ICE are minor compared to the tax breaks for new company car purchases.
“Fuel” costs are lower, provided it can be charged at home.
There are savings on congestion/ULEZ charges and, sometimes, parking.
Servicing and maintenance are usually lower.
However insurance costs can be higher, esp Teslas.
So a used EV can be worth a small premium over ICE for someone who covers a lot of miles daily (but within EV range) and/or drives in London or a similar city frequently and can charge at home. There may be quite a few people who fit that profile but nothing like the number who buy new for the tax breaks => oversupply looms.
FORD loosing $60,000 on every EV sold !
https://dailycaller.com/2023/05/03/ford-losing-tens-of-thousands-per-ev/
But they make up for it in volume.
£Losses/vehicle x high volume = financial disaster.
So. Ford do not want high volume EV sales. Even Tesla are just about scraping a profit at current volumes.
Ford have the F150, and other ICE vehicles, which keeps it in the black overall, Tesla has nowt, other then funding rounds, where investors buy into the Myth of Musk. So far it has worked for them, but we saw the myth lose some of its glorious shine when he bought Twatter.
Teslas are excellent cars.
Musk buying Twitter is the best thing I’ve seen this century.
“Private analysts expect that the cost of the manufacturing green subsidies… will top $1 trillion, with subsidies for the electric vehicle battery packs alone topping $130 billion.”
And the manufacturers like Ford still will not make money despite their slavering dreams about that big bribe.
I had not realised quite how much the elected* green fools over there have doubled down on their madness. Adam Smith wrote that, “A country has a lot of ruin in it,” meaning that every established economy is more resilient than people imagine. But, “a trillion of resources here and a trillion there…pretty soon you are actually ruined,” to update the old saying.
*As opposed to the unelected ones who can be understood as being naturally innumerate and irresponsible.
The Democrats are spending like drunken sailors and banning like sober Puritans. Its a toxic mix. Meanwhile the Woke are destroying medicine and the law by doing away with any kind of rigour and any kind of even-handedness. And the extreme Left are destroying various cities such as San Francisco and New York in a rerun of the 1970s. Meanwhile people are voting with their feet and businesses will follow. At some point Red states will resist funding the madness in Blue states.
The UK Government are currently tightening the rules concerning how many ICE cars can be manufactured.
ZEV mandate
The Government is currently consulting on the final design and future of the Zero Emission Vehicle mandate and whether new CO2 emissions should be introduced.
The ZEV mandate aims to promote the uptake of electric vehicles among drivers and increase the number of EVs made by manufacturers.
By next year, car makers will be required to ensure a minimum percentage of their new car sales are zero emission, with the first target being 22 percent.
“…zero emission…”
I had a pedal car when I was 4. It actually went quite fast. Not quite sure how it would coexist in a cycle lane with the two-wheeled bullies of today.
All governments seem to have a wonderful ability with subsidies and mandates to produce ‘unintended consequences.’.
In WW2 Germany it came about that many manufacturers found it impossible to get licences to purchase certain precious raw materials. However there was no limit to the number of trucks they could buy. So masses of brand new trucks were bought and immediately scrapped for their bits and pieces. Meanwhile their stretched Army in Russia was struggling with a chronic shortage of trucks…
The manufacturers should have made EVs that are AT LEAST as practical as ICE in the first place. It is crazy that they expect less practical and simultaneously more expensive vehicles to succeed in the market.
What is really scary though is that neither the manufacturers nor the motoring organisations are making any attempt at fighting the control freak politicians.
>>promote the uptake of electric vehicles
Not sure that the ordinary motorist actually has anyone defending them since the Automobile Association and the Royal Automobile Club not longer exist as founded. The AA and RAC are commercial companies. Motorcyclists have the BMF and MAG to speak for them and I made sure that MAG were consulted when I worked at the City of London to balance the cycling and walking nutters.
” Motorcyclists have the BMF and MAG to speak for them ”
MAG can be effective at local level, although their senior management team did suffer “internal differences” a few years ago.
I’ve not been aware of any activity from the BMF in recent years, although I’ve now looked at their website and they are still functioning.
Dave, there was a worse thing in WW2 Germany. Speer was desperate for labor to run the war industries, while the SS was murdering people by the train load.
Speer got 20 years at Spandau for using slave labor. The irony being that, for many, he saved their lives.
I cant even imagine how they think that can work? A manufacturer could plan to make 22% EVs but if after say 3 months most are unsold, what do you do? Stop all production (both EVs and ICEs) until the EVs are sold? And if nobody then buys the EVs?
What isn’t banned (under penalty of death) is compulsory (under penalty of death.)
Otherwise known as ‘totalitarianism.’
I think just like many of the government’s policies, they don’t think them through.
It is the virtual signalling that is important. Or at least up til the next election anyway.
As others have posted, net zero is a perfect cause for politicos. It creates unjustified fear over an extended period, which creates taxes and compliance over an extended period. Just like religion
A clever way to force the manufacturers to drop the price of EVs so that they do sell – even at a loss – to keep their business going. This will get more EVs on the road thus generating economies of scale for the manufacturers and for the EV charging infrastructure.
Price is only part of the problem. The major problems are the range and recharging times. Think about it. Fill an ICE from empty. It takes maximum ten minutes and you get around ten hours of actual use before it is empty again. Recharge an EV is measured in hours not minutes and you only get two or three hours of actual use before you have to recharge it again.
>>A clever way to force the manufacturers to drop the price of EVs so that they do sell
Paul, take a look at reaclimatescience.com……a receipt for a replacement battery for a Chevrolet volt…….over 29,800 dollars….it seems electric cars can give you a shock!
Lloyd Jones.
Golly, this story got into The Times this morning