Survey: Norwegian PHEVs Operate In Electric Mode 55% Of The Time, 98%+ EV Loyalty Rates

OCT 8 2016 BY MARK KANE 25

Tesla Model S

Tesla Model S

Volkswagen Golf GTE

Volkswagen Golf GTE

Norway’s Institute of Transport Economics released results of an interesting survey entitled “Learning from Norwegian Battery Electric and Plug-in Hybrid Vehicle users“.

The report has a very deep statistical base, as over 8,000 vehicle owners partcipated: 3,111 BEVs, 2,065 PHEVs and 3,080 ICEs.

One of the main insights is that PHEVs in Norway are, on average, covering about 55% of their miles in all-electric mode. This ratio is higher still while on a work commute.

Most of BEVs owners also have another car of some type:

  • 71% own an ICE
  • 4% own a PHEV
  • 4% own more than one BEV
  • 21% have a single BEV

In the case of PHEV and ICE owners, 46% and 48% of respondents (respectively) are single vehicle households.

Another interesting finding is that the Tesla Model S (called the most multi-purpose BEV) doesn’t often combine with other ICE vehicle ownership – perhaps a statement on its more wide-reaching range usefulness:

“The most multipurpose BEV, Tesla Model S, is twice as common in single BEV households as in households also owning ICEVs, and four times as common in households owning several BEVs.”

89% of BEV owners mentioned four main reasons to buy an all-electric car:

  • economy of use
  • environmental performance
  • future proof technology
  • free usage of toll roads without paying

PHEV owners had three reasons (over 80%):

  • economy of use
  • environmental performance
  • technology is future proof
Nissan LEAFs Lead World Record Bid With 260.5 EVs in Norway

EVs in Norway

Only 1% of BEV owners and 2% of PHEV owners announced they will not buy another BEV/PHEV again…that is some kind of astronomically high loyalty rate, and proves the adage that you never go back to gas after you’ve plugged in.

The survey also has some data on the type of trips taken:

“BEV owners use their BEVs more for all types of trips in every day traffic, but less on non-routine trips and vacation, than PHEV and ICEV owners do. BEV owners have about 7 km longer distance to work than owners of a PHEV or owners of an ICEV. BEV owners drive their BEVs about 15 500 km per year which is slightly more than PHEVs that are driven 15 200 km. ICEVs are used the least, around 15 000 km. Part of the difference may be due to higher share of ICEVs being owned by retired people.

Recurring long distance travel over 300 km, for instance to holiday houses, friends and family, is undertaken by close to 50% in all three owner groups. The share not doing recurring trips above 100 km, and trips in the interval 100-150 km, is somewhat higher among BEV owners, 12% versus 7-9% in the other groups. About 64% of BEV owners use their BEVs on at least one of the recurring trip types. On these trips, 74% charge their vehicle along the way using fast chargers, and 60% at the destination. PHEV owners do not need to charge to be able to carry out these trips but over half of them do it at the destination. About 20% of both groups stop at friends or family and charge.

BEV owners have a particularly vehicle based travel pattern and seems to be a sub group of new vehicle buyers that use vehicles very actively in everyday life. Their reasons to do so, is probably related to their larger households with many children and long distances to work.”

source: Norway’s Institute of Transport Economics via Green Car Congress

Categories: General

Tags: , ,

Leave a Reply

25 Comments on "Survey: Norwegian PHEVs Operate In Electric Mode 55% Of The Time, 98%+ EV Loyalty Rates"

newest oldest most voted

So 45% of the time PHEVs burn hydrocarbons and contribute the Global Warming.

PHEVs are NOT a bridge to BEVs since they are easier and more fun to drive.
PHEVs has always been a way to delay the all electric era and protect the eco-criminal profits(that WE pay for) of the petro-automobile cartel.

Considering the ridiculous EV range that most PHEV available today have, 55% EV mode is surprisingly much. Consider, aside from Chevrolet Volt / Opel Ampera and BMWi3 REX the majority of PHEV on the market does not go very far in EV only mode (especially when it is cold). Volt is not sold in Norway!
However, thanks to recuperation they still use less fuel than the standard ICE and they are usually not diesel engines…
I’m confident that with the advent of 400 km BEVs (aside from existing Tesla models), some of the PHEV owners will buy a BEV in a few years as well.

By giving their few BEVs a ridiculous range, ICE car makers want to keep us captives of PHEV, hybrids and ICE cars. If they succeed extinguishing Tesla’s efforts, we will be stuck with those ridiculously low AER PHEVs and mild hybrids forever…

1% market share is no victory. The curve of adoption should have gone exponential years ago if ICE car makers were serious producing more competing all electrics.
Worse, Fool cells will Succeed!

You like to blame the manufacturers meanwhile the real group to blame are the consumers. All the options are out there, and for the most part are heavily discounted because the people don’t want to pay for it. You seem to think the manufacturers have some magic ability to build a 500 mile capable BEV that costs $12k or something yet they aren’t…

The option of a doubled priced BEV? with 100 miles range? Hidden by the dealers? Produced in compliance only numbers? lol!

Exactly, the tech is expensive therefore most consumers don’t want to pay for a car that is admittedly lacking when compared to what is out there with a gas engine. You expect the legacy auto makers to lose even more $ by making even more cars they have to even more heavily discount and lose even more $$ on? Get real man.

I have a Volt because it makes financial sense. CAlifornia basically paid me back my down and I save it gas costs enough to more or less cover my monthly payment. I am able to charge at work so what works for me may not make financial sense for everyone which is admittedly what most people look at.

Exactly, yours is a sensible unemotional cost benefit analysis as is mine for my Mitsubishi Outlander phev here in Scotland. In my circumstances the phev is a financial and eco solution, and in your case the Leaf is.
Each to his own, but common sense is the bottom line.

There is some blame to go everywhere but first and foremost it is the goverments fault as they make the rules that companies and consumers have to follow…

Consumers cannot buy cars that legacy auto does not make…

Legacy auto is required by law to maximize their profits for shareholders…
This essentialy means legacy auto is required to put minimal effor into EVs and for them to delay their intorduction and sell as many ICEs as possible where they have made their investments over the last 100 years…

What are you driving yourself, RexxSee? I believe it’s a Prius, isn’t it? Last time I checked that car burns hydrocarbons almost all the time! At least 45% is better than 95%.

I’d rather have 30% of car drivers cut their pollution in half than 1% of drivers cut it completely.

If the car makers produced BEV instead of hybrids, there would be more than 30% of car drivers cutting to ZERO their emissions right now, and that’s my point.

The air we breathe, the water we drink, the ecosphere we need to survive must be the first concern of any economical system, well ahead of profit! I know it’s not the way it’s run and it’s the most dangerous behavior of humans, combine with the power we have given to our machines and technologies.

The lobbies are too powerful, the government doesn’t govern anymore. Politicians are too weak and too submissives to force the issue : the lack of commitment from existing ICE car makers to build good BEVs. Also their lack of accountability for the huge environmental mess they are creating.

Heck we are heading fast toward the end of civilization as we know it!

There is no time for this PHEV “transition period”. The technology was ready decades ago!

The remaining hydrocarbons MUST STAY IN THE GROUND!

No there wouldn’t because people are skeptical about cars with short range. The gas engine gives people the comfort that their cars can do all they want with it, which is why they consider them at all. For many people a sub 100 mile car is just a no-go. There is no doubt that pure electrics will take over at some time, that time probably isn’t that far off in the future either. I expect that already by 2025 gas cars will have lost their appeal and by 2030 no one will want to buy one. But were not quite there yet. With the latest generation, the Bolt, the model 3, the next gen LEAF and more that are just starting to come out, the market will take a huge step forward. We need a couple more steps to seal the deal. If you are old enough to drive you are old enough to realize that we can’t change the world overnight. Profit rules the world yes but profit has also done us a ton of good. We have lengthened our lives with at least 30 years, many diseases that used to kill us can easily be treated and we… Read more »

Yes there would… 15 years ago the EV1 had a range of 105 miles (EPA 2015 normalized). The RAV4-EV 90 and the Nissan Altra-EV 85.
THEY ALL FAKE NOT BEING ABLE TO GIVE MORE RANGE. This is why Musk did it, to show it could be done.
Teslas are expensive only because Tesla has 100 times less resources than any big ICE car maker.
Economy of scale would have taken care of the price tags long ago.

Besides your obvious conspiracy theory insanity, that “105 mile range” of the EV1 was fake too. You might as well take the Japanese NEDC range rating of the Nissan Leaf as a real world value if you want to believe that one. The EPA adjusted their testing to better reflect real world driving conditions around 2011-2012, so anything before that was nearly as fantastical as the J-NEDC.

The fact of the matter is that batteries are better now than they were in 1999. They’re cheaper, they have a higher energy density, and they have a higher power density. On top of that, the EV1 was built for the lowest possible air resistance coefficient and had only 2 seats, whereas cars like the e-Golf, the Soul EV and the Leaf were built for real people.

I’m sorry that you can’t get the EV you want at a price you can afford, but this is the reality. Batteries are simply more expensive than gas engines and can’t get you as far right now.

survey said:

“Most of BEVs owners also have another car of some type:

71% own an ICE”

So, apparently, 71% is higher than 45%….

This is a goldmine of information! One thing seems clear: even in Norway the real wave of BEV-sales has still to come. Why? Because most BEV-owners still have a second car. This means that most people/families that cannot afford two cars, didn’t buy a BEV yet. But the incentives to do so are enormous in Norway.

It could therefore be that the real wave will start with the over-300-km-BEVs. Probably not with the new Zoé, because of its remaining charging problems, but with the Ampera-e and later the Model 3. Let’s see what happens!

I think you are right. The markedshare among those buying a number two car is very high and mayby it is a saturation of the marked. When the afforable 200 miles EVs are coming, it will start to eat in the much larger number one car marked in Norway.

I still think the second ICE of the household is more of a security blanket than it is a real world need. The fact of the matter is that unless you frequently drive north of Grong (at 64º N!), or into the mountains of East Norway, you can definitely make the trip in even an older Nissan Leaf with a degraded battery.

The only other explanation would be that it just takes longer to drive the 300 km from Oslo to Otta.

Mutipurpose Model S??

They use it to plant row crops or something??

1)Intracity trips.
2)Intercity trips.
3)Long distance road trips.


Can’t use for every commercial purpose so it is not all purpose.

Sub 100 mile BEVs are good for 1.
New 41 kWh Zoe and 60 kWh Ampera-e are good for 1 and 2.

Quote: “Most of BEVs owners also have another car of some type:

71% own an ICE
4% own a PHEV
4% own more than one BEV
21% have a single BEV
In the case of PHEVs and BEVs, 46% and 48% of respondents (respectively) are single vehicle households.”

This doesn’t make any sense to me. First you say 21% of BEV owners only have a single BEV, but then you say 48% of BEV households are single vehicle households.”

So is it 21% or 48%?

I just looked up the original source:

And it’s says 48% ICEV, not BEV. Then it makes sene and doesn’t contradict itself.

Quote from the original source:
“Most BEV owners (71%) also own an ICEV, 4% a PHEV and 4% more than one BEV.
The remaining 21% only have the one BEV. 46% of PHEV owners and 48% of ICEV
owners belong to single vehicle household.”

Used Nissan leafs available now with 2/3 original warranty for 1/3 original price.

What and why all the abbreviations!!