Dr Mark Burgess, Oxford Brookes University - Drivers’ perceptions and experience of Electric Vehicles in the UK

1. Drivers’ Perceptions and Experiences
Of Electric Vehicles in the UK
Dr. Mark Burgess, Prof. Margaret Harris
Naomi King, Sarah Mansbridge
Oxford Brookes University, UK
Chris Walsh, Steve Carroll
Cenex, UK

2. Transition?
OLEV (2013): “Once in a lifetime technology change”

3. Objective Attributes
C02 Emissions, Capacity, Cylinders, Valves, Torque,
Top Speed, 0-60mph, Range, Refuelling/Recharging

4. Subjective Attributes

5. Drivers’ Own Beliefs, Expectations and Habituated Behaviour
Information From Others (Non-EV Drivers, EV Drivers, Media, Manufacturers)
Cognitively Mediated

6. Ford
Scottish and Southern Energy
Strathclyde University
Delta Motorsport, Westfield Sports Cars
Ecotricity Cars, Lightning, AEA Technology,
Green Motion Eco Car Hire
BMW Mini-E
Scottish and Southern Energy
Oxford Brookes University
Allied Electric Vehicles
Scottish Power
Axeon Batteries
Strathclyde University,
Glasgow City Council
Jaguar Land Rover (Tata), Smart,
Mitsubishi, Microcab
Eon Energy
Arup
Coventry and Birmingham City Councils
Aston and Coventry Universities
Nissan, Smith Electric Vehicles, AVID,
Liberty Electric Cars, Peugeot
Gateshead Council
Future Transport Systems
Newcastle University (TORG)
Toyota
EDF Energy
MET Police, Transport for London, GCDASmart UK
Nudge Advisory
TSB ULCV Demonstrator Programme

7. Ford
Scottish and Southern Energy
Strathclyde University
Delta Motorsport, Westfield Sports Cars
Ecotricity Cars, Lightning, AEA Technology,
Green Motion Eco Car Hire
BMW Mini-E
Scottish and Southern Energy
Oxford Brookes University
Allied Electric Vehicles
Scottish Power
Axeon Batteries
Strathclyde University,
Glasgow City Council
Jaguar Land Rover (Tata), Smart,
Mitsubishi, Microcab
Eon Energy
Arup
Coventry and Birmingham City Councils
Aston and Coventry Universities
Nissan, Smith Electric Vehicles, AVID,
Liberty Electric Cars, Peugeot
Gateshead Council
Future Transport Systems
Newcastle University (TORG)
Toyota
EDF Energy
MET Police, Transport for London, GCDASmart UK
Nudge Advisory
TSB ULCV Demonstrator Programme
276,989 individual trips
1,559,144 miles travelled (2,508,663km)
51,659 charging events
Carroll et al. (2013). The Ultra-Low Carbon Vehicle Demonstrator
Programme: Assessing the Viability of Electric Vehicles in Daily Life.

8. Challenge of Transition
Known Relatively Unknown

9. 212 Private; 140 Corporate
76% Male, 24% Female
23 – 71 yrs (M = 46)
67% of PD: £267/month lease
25% > £100,000; 45% > £75,000
91% White
85% Married/Cohabiting
Participants (n = 352)

10. Typical EV Performance?

11. Variety of EVs in the TSB trial

12. Superior Generation of EVs
Performance
Acceleration
Handling

13. The Top Speed of My EV Was
Sufficient
4.24 (0.83) 4.50 (0.79)
88% Agreement 98% Agreement
PD FD

14. My EV Was Fun To Drive
4.59 (0.58) 4.50 (0.87)
97% Agreement 94% Agreement
PD FD

15. Energy Consumption
I’m driving it quite sportily. I’m not trying to eek the range
out. It’s not a consideration, driving carefully Driver 27

16. Nature of EV Meanings?
General stereotype has been
-ve

17. Nature of EV Meanings?
General stereotype has been
-ve
Burgess, King, Harris & Lewis. (2013) EV drivers’ reported interactions with the
public: Driving stereotype change? Transportation Research Part F, 17, 33-44.

18. I Would Recommend EVs To Others
4.38 (0.67) 4.41 (0.69)
94% Agreement 96% Agreement
PD FD

19. Challenge: Diffusion of Innovation
Next step: Bridging the Chasm to the
non-EV driving public
Often, exposure of mainstream to innovators/early adopters helps with diffusion
and helps change cultural context & meanings surrounding new technology.

20. Novel Features

21. Learning to Use My EV Will Be Easy
4.21 (0.75) 4.22 (0.74)
88% Agreement 90% Agreement
PD FD

22. My EV Will Be As Easy To Use As My
Normal Car
3.85 (0.88) 3.80 (0.91)
75% Agreement 70% Agreement
PD FD

23. Ease of Use/Interpretation
Regenerative braking
Displays
Positive feature, immediate, preferential use
Clear, understandable, visually arresting

24. Regenerative braking
Positive feature, immediate, preferential use
How Much?
“No Idea”
Ease of Use/Interpretation

25. Learning to Use My EV Will Be Easy
4.21 (0.75) 4.22 (0.74)
88% Agreement 90% Agreement
PD FD

26. Learning to Use My EV Was Easy
4.67 (0.48) 4.72 (0.57)
97% Agreement 98% Agreement
PD FD

27. My EV Will Be As Easy To Use As My
Normal Car
3.85 (0.88) 3.80 (0.91)
75% Agreement 70% Agreement
PD FD

28. My EV Was As Easy To Use As My
Normal Car
4.45 (0.70) 4.44 (0.86)
95% Agreement 92% Agreement
PD FD

29. Initial Adaptation

30. Introduction to the Vehicle
All drivers quickly learn:
Drive competently
Use regenerative braking
Interpret displays
Primary Adaptation

31. EV Limitations

32. Social: Impede widespread adoption
Personal: Will suit my needs
Range

33. Well, it will be just perfect because I’ll
charge it at night and it’ll do exactly what
I’ll need for my daily commute Driver 9
Routine won’t change but
Range: ▼ exceptional journeys
▲ cognitive load

34. AUTHORATIVE VOICES
Manufacturers: “It should do XXX, but don’t count on it doing
more than two thirds of that” … “I took it on a drive to exhaust the
range, but I did ask someone to drive a tow-truck behind me”
Fleet Managers: “We’ve drummed it into them that it must go
on charge the minute they finish with it and not be left with less
than 100% charge for the next user”
Media: 5 star review of BMW i3 – Review devoted almost
entirely to the journalists’ fear of running out of charge

35. Adequate and Ideal Ranges (miles/km)
75m (120km)
230m (368km)
100m (160km)
170m (272km)
Pre

36. 90m (144km)
210m (336km)
117m (187km)
166m (266km)
3m
Adequate and Ideal Ranges (miles/km)

37. Confidently Driving On One Charge
(miles/km)
90m (144km)
210m (336km)
117m (187km)
166m (266km)
67m (107km)
76m (122km)
Range Given By Manufacturer = 100 miles (160km)
3m

38. Distances Travelled
National Travel Survey: M = 7 miles (11km)

39. Distance Travelled Between Charges
Distances between charges – but not overall distance -
increases over time (15%)
Bunce, Harris & Burgess. (2014). Charge up then charge out? Drivers’ perceptions
& experiences of EVs in the UK. Transportation Research Part A, 59., 278-287

40. Energy Consumption
Fits their life/needs
Direct replacement for majority of journeys
No need to alter driving behaviour

41. I Deliberately Attempted to Exhaust
The Range
30% AGREEMENT
2.51 (1.30)

42. State of Charge Use
Private Drivers utilized lower SoC than Corporate Drivers
Mansbridge, Burgess & Harris (forthcoming). EV drivers overcome range anxiety prior
To their first trip.

43. 1 Week Post Pick-Up
Drivers Challenging Range Limits
Consequence: Recognise how regen, route
selection, and style inter-connect
& enable them to exert control
I’ve often been presented with a really sad picture of only
having 8% left, and I have 20 miles to do. And doing
motorway travelling it’s very difficult to adapt your style,
but when you actually go off from the motorway you can
still travel about another 20 miles on that 8% Driver 4

44. 1 Week Post Pick-Up
Drivers Challenging Range Limits
Experience: Understanding of inter-connectivity
of different factors on EV performance
Shows drivers as active decision makers
Secondary Adaptation
ONLY achieved by those who challenge the range
Secondary Adaptation not simply a result of personal
disposition – Can also result from a critical incident

45. Adaptive Consequences of Challenging Range
Data Logger Analyses:
Longest single trip:
Secondary 68miles/109km
Primary 50miles/80km F (1, 38) = 11.20, p = 0.002, R2
adj = .21
Longest distance between charges:
Secondary 95miles/152km
Primary 82miles/131km F (1, 38) = 6.63, p = 0.014, R2
adj = .13
3 Months
Number of trips for longest distance between charges
Secondary 6.23
Primary 9.78 F (1, 38) = 3.90, p = 0.05, R2
adj = .07

46. Finish Line
End of Trial: Price, Maintenance & Support Become Major Issues
Secondary Adaptation: Higher level of expertise
Test Drive: Take drivers out of comfort zone
Driving an EV like an ICE without challenging range and without
consideration of unique features of EVs does not facilitate higher
levels of adaptation and leaves drivers with lower expertise

47. Finish Line
Subjective:
3 times as many drivers feel EVs “match” an
identity of “technology innovation” as do feeling
“green”
“Green” comes loaded with a baggage that “Clean”
does not
4 times as many drivers feel EVs “enhance” an
identity of “technology innovation” as do feeling
“green”

48. Finish Line
Viable in Daily Life? Yes! …. (but ….)
Purchasing: How to convert beyond the early adopter & effectively
engage corporate fleet drivers
Consumer Demands: Strong pull towards “normality” including
range capability (car) and entrenched behaviour (person)
Suboptimal Usage: Drivers’ own beliefs – and input from media and
some manufacturers – encourage cautious behaviour