Alternative Fuels: Hopscotch or Leapfrog to Electric Vehicles?

February 2, 2018

Spencer P. Cavalier, CFA, ASA. Managing Director & Principal and Christian P. Klawunder, Senior Associate

Click here for a print-friendly PDF version

Introduction
Over the past few years, like many of you, Matrix has observed an increase in media coverage regarding the emergence and proclaimed imminent market disruption of plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs) in the light duty vehicle (LDV) fleet (i.e. passenger cars, light trucks, minivans and sport utility vehicles). PEVs include plug-in electric hybrids (PHEVs) and all-electric vehicles, also referred to as battery electric vehicles (BEVs). Hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) do not require to be plugged-in to recharge batteries. It seems that professional pundits are everywhere, and it does not matter what your background is, as long as you are familiar with a few buzzwords.

Legislative and regulatory support from federal and state governments, as well as lobbying from special interest groups, has shown stronger support for PEVs than any of the previous alternative fuels we have tracked historically, including biofuels (biomass, algae, switchgrass, biodiesel), alcohol fuels (methanol, ethanol, butanol), propane autogas, natural gas, ammonia, etc. It’s as if we have switched from playing alternative fuels hopscotch and leapfrogged directly to PEVs.

It goes without saying that gaining a clear understanding of any potential future threat to your current business model is integral for capital planning. The potential widespread adoption of PEVs is a pertinent topic of conversation, not only for wholesale fuels distributors, but also convenience retailing companies, the majority of which continue to rely on the contribution of motor fuels sales volumes for over 50% of their gross profits. As much as retailers have strived to improve inside sales and margins, the forecourt continues to drive cash flow for most. There is a considerable amount of irresponsible, sensational and conflicting information that is currently in the public domain related to the potential adoption of PEVs. This makes forming an educated and accurate opinion quite challenging. It requires significant, balanced, and thorough research and study.

We are investment bankers dedicated to the downstream energy and convenience retail industry, and as such the emphasis of our expertise is not in alternative fuels and alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs), projecting adoption rates of new technologies or forecasting demand for conventional motor fuels. However, we are often asked our opinions on these topics. Our daily interaction with people from many segments of the petroleum marketing and convenience store industry, including company owners and operators, branded and unbranded fuel suppliers, environmental firms, trade associations, think tanks and government agencies, puts us in a unique position from which we can pool information from these sources to help shape our observations and perspectives.

The purpose of this article is not to make bold predictions about the potential adoption rates of LDV PEVs. Our intent is to share our observations and insights gathered over time about alternative fuels with an emphasis on PEVs. We also want to provide our readers with select, public information we view as most pertinent, as well as the sources of information we deem most responsible, credible and independent. Specifically, we will focus on the following areas:

• Challenges facing alternative fuels and consumer adoption of AFVs
• The HEV mystery and consumer purchasing behavior
• Conditions affecting consumer adoption of PEVs
• Global policies and other factors that will lead to eventual PEV adoption
• Discrepancies in EV adoption projections
• Urbanization and ridesharing services projected to spur autonomous vehicles
• Reliable and diligent AFV research organizations

At Matrix we like to look at the PEV market overall, instead of just the all-electric battery vehicle (BEV) segment because although PHEVs use gasoline, diesel and electricity, the adoption of PHEVs negatively affects conventional motor fuels sales. We think PEVs are a legitimate technology, and due to global concerns on climate change, population growth, regulations such as Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) in the U.S., and the potential for BEV technology to be more economical to operate than internal combustion engine vehicles (ICEVs), PEVs, especially BEVs, are receiving mandated support from governments worldwide.

Consumer adoption of PEVs is certainly a concern for conventional fuels marketers long-term, but we do not believe conventional petroleum marketing is doomed in the next 5 to 15 years as some experts are suggesting. If the adoption rate of PEVs were about to accelerate towards a tipping point, the consensus would be larger and momentum would be much stronger, but it is not. Lastly, as mentioned throughout this article, we believe that widespread consumer adoption of any disruptive technology must make lives better, easier, and more economical to truly motivate change. No AFV has accomplished this, including PEVs…at least not yet.

Challenges Facing Alternative Fuels and Consumer Adoption of AFVs
According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), transportation accounts for approximately 28% of all energy consumed in the U.S., with LDVs accounting for approximately 57% of that consumption in 2016 [1]. Thus, LDVs’ significant portion of energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) (primarily carbon dioxide) have made them a focus for developing alternative fuels, and according to energy experts, most of this attention on pollution from transportation, and the increased attention for alternative fuels, have occurred over the last 20 years [2].

The U.S. Department of Energy’s Alternative Fuels Data Center, (AFDC) www.afdc.energy.gov/, provides a very good introduction and summary of the primary alternative fuels available. We’ve followed these alternative fuels over the years, and none has achieved widespread commercial success. The following table is a summary of the pros and cons of each primary alternative fuel, based on a study by Consumer Reports and information from the AFDC.

While each alternative fuel has its advantages and disadvantages, there is a consistent theme for all: no alternative LDV transportation fuel has been able to achieve the level of economic advantage and ease of use required to gain widespread consumer adoption. You will note that we did not include advanced biofuels, as we believe most people would agree that ethanol would have not made widespread commercial inroads without the renewable volume obligations mandated by the 2005 Renewable Fuels Standards, further extended in 2007, and government subsidies.

Some critics have stated that there are not enough AFV model offerings for consumers. However, that criticism would be debatable according to information provided by the AFDC, which tracked original equipment manufacturers’ LDV offerings from 1991 – 2016 for AFVs, HEVs and diesels. In aggregate, 1,822 models have been offered (including E85 and diesel options). The following graph illustrates the breakdown of models offered.

The primary reasons for lack of widespread consumer adoption seem to be cost, short driving range, and limited refueling options. Let’s consider that consumers would set aside concerns regarding cost and limited driving range, leaving refueling options as the only remaining issue. Our belief is that there are simply not enough convenient, fast refueling options for any of the above alternative fuels. The AFDC tracks the number of public and private alternative fueling stations, by state and technology. The following table shows the aggregate count by alternative fuel, for both public and private fueling stations, as of January 6, 2018. As a comparison, according to the 2018 NACS/Nielson Convenience Industry Store Count, there are 122,522 sites selling traditional motor fuels in the U.S.

The HEV Mystery & Consumer Purchasing Behavior
With this lack of refueling infrastructure in place, over the years we have assumed that the natural consumer choice would be the adoption of HEVs, which eliminate the primary AFV adoption challenges, except for maybe the marginal additional HEV purchase cost of $3,000 to $5,000 above an equivalent conventional vehicle [3]. While this thesis may ultimately become true, currently consumers do not seem to choose HEVs over conventional ICEVs. The following graph shows HEV sales by model from 1999 through 2015. HEV sales actually decreased in 2014 and 2015 (sales data by model for 2016 and 2017 was not available in a consistent manner).

Each year the Fuels Institute, in conjunction with NACS, conducts a survey to evaluate vehicle attributes that are most important to consumers [4]. The most recent survey results, completed in February 2017, showed a reduced interest in AFVs, including HEVs. The following two graphs included in the survey report are focused on AFV interest and the relationship between gas prices and hybrid sales. Please note that further study is required to better determine the relationship between crude oil price changes and PEV unit sales volumes. Having a better understanding of that positive or negative correlation should help improve forecasting PEV sales.

In summary, consumers claim to be extremely interested in AFVs (especially the younger generations), but their actual purchasing habits differ. Our thesis that HEVs would be the consumer bridge from ICEVs to PEVs has been incorrect, and HEVs’ negative effect on conventional motor fuels volume is difficult to gauge.

Conditions Affecting Consumer Adoption of PEVs
According to IHS Markit, LDV sales in the U.S. were over 17 million units for 2017, with light truck and SUV categories experiencing stronger growth than cars. In fact, due to the popularity of trucks, crossovers and SUVs, the last three years have been the best in history for LDV sales volumes, with each eclipsing 17 million units sold. Ford sold 896,764 F-Series trucks in 2017. According to InsideEVs, the market share for PEVs (again, defined as the combination of PHEVs and BEVs) was approximately 1.2%, accounting for 199,826 units sold in 2017 versus 158,614 in 2016. The following models were the most popular in 2017:

According to Melissa Lynes, an industry economist with the EIA, the following are some of the primary conditions affecting PEV sales: [5]

1. Policy
2. Reduction in incremental electric vehicle costs
3. Consumer sentiment
  1. Range anxiety
  2. Model availability
Competition from improving incumbent technologies and other alternative propulsion technology

Of the consumer sentiment expressed by Ms. Lynes’ conditions, #2 and #3 are reflected in the table of the top selling PEVs, and reports from WardsAuto reflect that trucks and SUVs have been the highest growth segments for LDV sales for each of the last three years. While consumers value fuel efficiency, they seem to value safety, cost and range more, especially in an environment of low gas prices. None of the PEVs in the table offer the perfect balance of affordability and size (a factor in safety). You either purchase an expensive Tesla to get a larger vehicle with better range, or sacrifice size to get a lower price. Range anxiety will remain an issue until PEV models desired by consumers can travel 400 miles on a single charge and have the size to attract more consumers. Lastly, automakers have addressed Ms. Lynes’ condition #4 by applying fuel enhancing technologies (such as turbo chargers) and lighter car materials to improve ICEV mpg. Consumer preferences may change if the delta between the retail price of conventional motor fuels (gasoline and diesel) and electricity (on a gasoline equivalent basis) expands to make electricity even more competitive.

The following graph shows the cost per gasoline gallon equivalent relationship between gasoline, diesel and electricity from April 2000 – October 2017.

Global Policies and Other Factors that will Lead to Eventual Adoption of PEVs
Due to global concerns over climate change, to which many scientists attribute significantly to tailpipe CO2 emissions, consumers may ultimately have no choice but to purchase a PEV. According to a study titled “Global Initiatives: Assessing Current & Future Global Initiatives on Fuels and Vehicles” prepared by Future Fuel Strategies for the Fuels Institute in 2017, only twenty years ago countries were just beginning to consider the environmental impact of transport emissions. Few countries had instituted fuel economy standards and there were no GHG standards. This has changed markedly in the last 10 years as many more countries have set both LDV and heavy-duty vehicle (HDV) emission standards. Further, in addition to governments, many global non-government organizations (such as the International Council on Clean Transportation, the Global Fuel Economy Initiative, etc.) have emerged to provide analysis, advocacy and advisory to countries seeking transport policies.

Compounding environmental concerns are projected world population and economic growth, which will lead to more transport emissions. In its 2017 Outlook for Energy: A View to 2040, ExxonMobil predicts world population to grow to 9.1 billion in 2040 from 7.3 billion today, and that global GDP will double, led by non-Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries (which includes China). As people from non-OECD countries join the middle class, it is expected many will want personal mobility over public transportation, and will purchase a LDV. The following graph from the International Energy Agency (IEA) projects the increase in LDV fleet for OECD and non-OECD countries.

These concerns have motivated cities and countries to mandate transport emissions policies. The following are select agreements and mandates, taken directly from the Future Fuel Strategies’ report:

• 159 countries ratify the Paris Agreement (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) as of August 2017
• 33 countries have set biofuel mandates
• 41 countries have set renewable transport requirements (28 of these countries are EU members)
• 37 countries have set fuel economy standards for LDV fleets (CAFE in the U.S.)
• 35 countries have set fuel economy standards for light commercial vehicles
• 4 countries have set fuel economy standards for HDVs
• 13 countries have set zero emission vehicle (ZEV) support policies, such as EV purchase and use incentives
• 10 U.S. states, led by California, have set ZEV support policies, including EV purchase and use incentives
• 24 cities and countries globally have set a future ban or limitations on ICEVs

The following graph illustrates leading countries setting transport policies and their PEV stock (i.e. LDVs on the road).

Norway’s policies to promote PEV consumer adoption are some of the most aggressive, granting purchase incentives for BEVs of $20,000 and PHEVS of $12,000, plus tax incentives, and waivers on fees for tolls, parking and ferries [6]. In 2015, Norway was the leading country globally for PEV sales as a percentage of total LDV sales, by far.

Matrix’s long-term belief is that governments at all levels and regulatory agencies will continue to create and extend policies that will support lower emission vehicles and promote PEVs over ICEVs. U.S. LDV manufacturers are already investing billions to extend mileage and lower emissions to meet CAFE standards, which increase average fuel economy to 54.5 miles per gallon for cars and light-duty trucks by model year 2025.

However, will a full complement of consumer desired PEVs be available that eliminate consumer concerns regarding purchase price, maintenance, range limitations, and ease of recharging? There are many variables involved, but a primary consideration is battery cost and performance. On a dollar per kilowatt hour basis, battery costs have decreased markedly since 2015, and are projected to decrease exponentially over the next few years, enhancing the purchase of EVs and operating cost competitiveness versus ICEVs.

Discrepancies in EV Adoption Projections
Trying to understand and form opinions about the viability, cost-benefit, and timing of any potential disruptive technology can be extremely difficult. And, the challenge is compounded even more given the role social media plays in today’s global society. Let’s take for example a video published in June of 2017 by the Colorado Renewable Energy Society (CRES) featuring a speech by Tony Seba titled “Clean Disruption – Energy & Transportation”. The video, which was posted on YouTube by CRES, outlined Seba’s bold predictions that all gas stations and car manufacturers will disappear within 10 years. Needless to say, this caused much anxiety and unrest throughout the industry, and alarmed many petroleum marketers.

As we are learning, there are way too many variables to responsibly and confidently predict PEV adoption and its effect on liquid fuels demand, especially with seemingly current, peaked consumer interest. It should be noted that most experts tend to focus projections on EVs versus PEVs due to the trend away from combustion engines. The disparity in projections by experts varies tremendously, as illustrated by the following graph by the Fuels Institute.

Urbanization and Ridesharing Services Projected to Spur Autonomous Vehicles
While ridesharing services such as Lyft and Uber have been widely adopted by consumers, especially generations X, Y and Z, it is difficult to project their long-term effect on LDV motor fuels volume. These services are most popular and effective in highly populated urban markets, and experts often suggest these services will be early adopters of autonomous vehicles due to short ride durations and controlled city street systems versus less consistent suburban and rural roads. Further, if ridesharing companies begin to employ autonomous vehicles in these urban markets, it is likely that these vehicles will be PEVs due to access to recharging infrastructure, lower operating costs and city mandates on emissions controls.

Projections for consumer acceptance of autonomous vehicles vary tremendously due to price and safety concerns. As reported in Barron’s, autonomous cars are currently expensive (~$250,000). But does price matter for younger generations who question the need to even purchase a vehicle? These generations of people who live in urban markets may likely choose autonomous EV ridesharing services, like Uber’s first self-driving fleet in Pittsburgh. Should this mode of transportation be adopted widely by urban dwellers, it would certainly have a negative effect on liquid motor fuels demand. However, it is perceived that the same impact on liquid motor fuels would be much less from autonomous EV LDVs in suburban and rural markets.

Reliable and Diligent Alternative Fuels Research Organizations
We have found the following sources to be the most insightful, independent and diligent in their research and publications regarding LDV electrification:

• Fuels Institute. John Eichberger, Executive Director. www.fuelsinstitute.org
• U.S. Energy Information Agency. Melissa Lynes, Industry Economist. www.eia.gov
• U.S. Department of Energy’s Alternative Fuels Data Center. www.afdc.energy.gov
• InsideEVs. www.insideevs.com
• IHS Markit. www.ihsmarkit.com

Conclusion
Over the years, petroleum marketing and convenience retailing companies have faced many challenges and adjusted their business models and capital allocations to thrive. While we certainly are not dismissive of long-term PEV consumer adoption, PEVs currently struggle for market share due to a lack of cost competitiveness, recharging infrastructure and required lifestyle changes. Barring a major improvement in battery technology or a complete government mandate, mass consumer adoption of PEVs will not reach a tipping point unless and until these criteria are addressed, as consumers base their purchasing decisions on value for the dollar, needs and desires. However, regardless of individual beliefs on climate change, we do believe that there is an expanding international movement on mandates to address it. Those concerns and mandates, combined with the growing desire for social responsibility by younger generations, will facilitate and potentially accelerate PEV adoption.

Our intentions for this article were to present what we deem to be the most pertinent information on electric vehicle consumer adoption and to share our thoughts on the most credible and independent sources for you to follow. While we have shared our observations and perspectives, it is not our intent to shape yours. We have cited all of the materials we consulted during the research process, which is included for your review. We hope that this article provided level insight and helped you focus on what we deem to be pertinent information sources as you follow and evaluate PEV consumer adoption and its potential effect on the future of your business.

Disclaimer:

The contents of this publication are presented for informational purposes only by Matrix Capital Markets Group, Inc. and MCMG Capital Advisors, Inc. (“Matrix”), and nothing contained herein is an offer to sell or a solicitation to purchase any of the securities discussed. The contents of this publication are presented for informational purposes only. While Matrix believes the information presented in this publication is accurate, this publication is provided “AS IS” and without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied, including, but not limited to, the implied warranty of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, or non-infringement. Matrix assumes no responsibility for errors or omissions in this Presentation or other documents which may be contained in, referenced, or linked to this publication. Any recipient of this publication is expressly responsible to seek out its own professional advice with respect to the information contained herein.

Matrix’s Downstream Energy & Convenience Retail Group is recognized as the national leader in providing transactional advisory services to companies in the downstream energy and multi‐site retail sectors.

SOURCES

• Cavalier, Spencer, and John Eichberger. “Insights on PEV Consumer Adoption.” 19 Jan. 2018
• Cavalier, Spencer, and Melissa Lynes. “Insights on PEV Consumer Adoption.” 5 Jan. 2018
• Seba, Tony. “Clean Disruption of Energy & Transportation”. YouTube, 2017
• 2017 Outlook for Energy: A View to 2040.” ExxonMobil, 2017, cdn.exxonmobil.com/~/media/global/files/outlook-for-energy/2017/2017-outlook-for-energy.pdf
• “AAA Fact Sheet.” AAA Newsroom, 12 Jan. 2017, http://newsroom.aaa.com/about-aaa/aaa-fact-sheet/
• “Annual Energy Outlook 2017.” U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), 5 Jan. 2017, http://www.eia.gov/aeo
• “Annual Energy Outlook, Light-Duty Vehicle Stock by Technology Type.” U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), http://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/data/browser/#/?id=49-AEO2017&cases=ref2017&sourcekey=
• “Consumers and Alternative Fuels 2017.” Fuels Institute, Research, 8 Dec. 2017, www.fuelsinstitute.org/research.shtm
• “Enabling Fast Charging: A Technology Gap Assessment.” U.S. Department of Energy, Oct. 2017, https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2017/10/f38/XFC%20Technology%20Gap%20Assessment%20Report_FINAL_10202017.pdf
• ”Fuel Prices: Alternative Fuel Price Report2017, www.afdc.energy.gov/fuels/prices.html
• “Global EV Outlook 2016: Beyond One Million Electric Cars.” IEA, https://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/Global_EV_Outlook_2016.pdf
• “Global Initiatives: Assessing Current & Future Global Initiatives on Fuels & Vehicles.” Fuels Institute, Research, 17 Nov. 2017, www.fuelsinstitute.org/research.shtm
• “How Wireless Charging Could Change the Car Industry.” The Economist, 8 Nov. 2017, https://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2017/11/economist-explains-4
• “Hybrid/EV Buying Guide: The Era of the Electrified Car Has Arrived.” Consumer Reports, Aug. 2016, https://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/hybrids-evs/buying-guide/index.htm (updated Jan. 2018)
• “International Energy Outlook 2017.” U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), 14 Sept. 2017, www.eia.gov/outlooks/ieo/
• “Question.” Received by Dylan Remley, Question, 4 Jan. 2018
• “Reinventing the Wheel – A Multiclient Study.” IHS Markit, Sept. 2017, https://ihsmarkit.com/products/reinventing-wheel-multiclient-study.html
• “Research Questions.” Received by Amanda Appelbaum, Research Questions, 3 Jan. 2018
• “The Death of the Internal Combustion Engine.” The Economist, 12 Aug. 2017, www.economist.com/news/leaders/21726071-it-had-good-run-end-sight-machine-changed-world-death

• “The Pros and Cons on Alternative Fuels: Learn More about Some of the Alternatives to Gas-Powered Vehicles”, Consumer Reports, Feb. 2014, https://www.consumerreports.org/cro/2011/05/pros-and-cons-a-reality-check-on-alternative-fuels/index.htm
• “Tomorrow’s Vehicles – Projection of the Light Duty Vehicle Fleet Through 2025.” Fuels Institute, Navigant Research, 17 June 2017, http://www.fuelsinstitute.org/ResearchArticles/Tomorrows%20Vehicles%20Brief.pdf
• “Tomorrow’s Vehicles a Projection of the Medium and Heavy-Duty Vehicle Fleet Through 2025.” Fuels Institute, Navigant Research, 17 June 2017, http://www.fuelsinstitute.org/ResearchArticles/Tomorrows%20Vehicles%20Brief.pdf
• “Tomorrow’s Vehicles an Overview of Vehicle Sales and Fuel Consumption Through 2025.” Fuels Institute, Navigant Research, 17 June 2017, http://www.fuelsinstitute.org/ResearchArticles/Tomorrows%20Vehicles%20Brief.pdf
• U.S., 115th Congress, “H.R. 3388 – Self Drive Act.” pp. 1–37, https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/3388/text
• U.S. Department of Energy, 2018, https://www.energy.gov/
• Bary, Emily. “Watch Out, Tesla. The Competition Is Gaining.” Barron’s, 30 Sept. 2017, https://www.barrons.com/articles/watch-out-tesla-the-competition-is-gaining-1506746035
• Bradsher, Keith. “China Hastens the World Toward an Electric-Car Future.” The New York Times, 9 Oct. 2017, https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/09/business/china-hastens-the-world-toward-an-electric-car-future.html
• Chafkin, Max. “Uber’s First Self-Driving Fleet Arrives in Pittsburgh This Month.” Bloomberg, 18 Aug. 2016, www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2016-08-18/uber-s-first-self-driving-fleet-arrives-in-pittsburgh-this-month-is06r7on
• Eichberger, John. “Global Trends and the Pace of Domestic Change.” SIGMA, 18 Jan. 2018, Sun Valley, Idaho.
• “Lawrence, Mackinnon and Jan Vrins. “Navigating the Energy Transformation: Building a Competitive Advantage Energy Cloud 2.0.” , Navigant, 12 Aug. 2016, www.navigant.com/-/media/www/site/insights/energy/2016/navigatingtheenergytransformation.pdf
• Lynes, Melissa. “Projecting Light-Duty Electric Vehicle Sales in the National Energy Modeling System (NEMS) and World Energy Projection System plus (WEPS+).” U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), 27 June 2017, https://www.eia.gov/conference/2017/pdf/presentations/melisssa_lynes.pdf
• McCarthy, Niall. “Tesla Dominates the U.S. Electric Vehicle Market [Infographic].” Forbes, 14 Aug. 2017, www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2017/08/14/tesla-dominates-the-u-s-electric-vehicle-market-infographic/#63ebdd717be4
• McCarthy, Niall. “Tesla Dominates the U.S. Electric Vehicle Market.” Statista, 15 Aug. 2017, https://www.statista.com/chart/10684/tesla-dominates-the-us-electric-vehicle-market/
• Morrow, Kevin, Donald Karner, James Francfort. “Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Review.” U.S. Department of Energy Vehicle Technologies Program, Nov. 2008, https://avt.inl.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/phev/phevInfrastructureReport08.pdf
• Moss, Trefor. “China, With Methodical Discipline, Conjures a Market for Electric Cars.” The Wall Street Journal, 2 Oct. 2017, www.wsj.com/articles/china-with-methodical-discipline-takes-global-lead-in-electric-cars-1506954248
• Neidig, Harper. “House Passes Bill Paving the Way for Driverless Cars.” The Hill, 6 Sept. 2017, thehill.com/policy/technology/349418-house-passes-driverless-car-legislation
• Riley, Charles. “Volkswagen Needs Batteries That Would Fill 4 Gigafactories.” CNN Money, 12 Sept. 2017, money.cnn.com/2017/09/12/technology/volkswagen-batteries-electric-cars/index.html? iid=EL
• Shahan, Zachary. “30 Reasons Your Next Car Should Be Electric.” Clean Technica, 31 Aug. 2016, https://cleantechnica.com/2016/08/31/30-reasons-next-car-electric/ Swartz, Jon. “No Fear, Loathing in Vegas in Driverless Car.” Barron’s, 8 Jan. 2018, www.barrons.com/articles/no-fear-loathing-in-vegas-in-driverless-car-1515424398
• Thomas, Nathalie. “Green Battery Advocates Accentuate the Positive.” Financial Times, 22 May 2017, www.ft.com/content/a6e01984-3567-11e7-99bd-13beb0903fa3
• Todd, Jennifer. “Creating the Clean Energy Economy: Analysis of the Electric Vehicle Industry.” International Economic Development Council (IED), www.iedconline.org/clientuploads/Downloads/edrp/IEDC_Electric_Vehicle_Industry.pdf
• Valdes-Dapena, Peter. “Renault, Nissan and Mitsubishi Team up on Self-Driving and Electric Cars.” CNN Money, 15 Sept. 2017, http://money.cnn.com/2017/09/15/technology/renault-nissan-mitsubishi-alliance-electric-self-driving-cars/index.html?%20iid=EL
• Valdes-Dapena, Peter. “GM: The Future is All-Electric.” CNN Money, 2 Oct. 2017, money.cnn.com/2017/10/02/technology/gm-electric-cars/index.html
• Vitale, Joseph, Jr., et al. “What’s Ahead for Fully Autonomous Driving, Consumer Opinions on Advanced Vehicle Technology, Perspectives from Deloitte’s Global Automotive Consumer Study.” Deloitte, 2017, https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/cn/Documents/cip/deloitte-cn-cip-fully-auto-driving-2017-en-170814.pdf
• Wood, Eric, et al. “National Plug-In Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Analysis.” U.S. Department of Energy, Sept. 2017, www.nrel.gov/docs/fy17osti/69031.pdf