See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/236163806

Consumer attitudes towards battery electric vehicles: A large-scale survey

Article  in  International Journal of Electric and Hybrid Vehicles · April 2013

DOI: 10.1504/IJEHV.2013.053466

CITATIONS READS

23 4,292

5 authors, including:

Kenneth Lebeau Philippe Lebeau

Vrije Universiteit Brussel Vrije Universiteit Brussel
12 PUBLICATIONS   300 CITATIONS    25 PUBLICATIONS   185 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Olivier Mairesse Cathy Macharis

University-Hospital Brugmann UVC Vrije Universiteit Brussel
79 PUBLICATIONS   547 CITATIONS    291 PUBLICATIONS   4,083 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Crowd logistics View project

Development of Smart and Modular Second-Life Battery System for Smart Grid Applications View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Joeri Van Mierlo on 22 May 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

28 Int. J. Electric and Hybrid Vehicles, Vol. 5, No. 1, 2013

Consumer attitudes towards battery electric

vehicles: a large-scale survey

Kenneth Lebeau*
Vrije Universiteit Brussel,
Department of Mathematics, Operational Research, Statistics
and Information Systems (MOSI) – Transport & Logistics,
Pleinlaan 2, 1050, Brussels, Belgium
E-mail: Kenneth.Lebeau@vub.ac.be
*Corresponding author

Joeri Van Mierlo

Vrije Universiteit Brussel,
Department of Electrical Engineering (ETEC),
Pleinlaan 2, 1050, Brussels, Belgium
E-mail: Joeri.Van.Mierlo@vub.ac.be

Philippe Lebeau, Olivier Mairesse

and Cathy Macharis
Vrije Universiteit Brussel,
Department of Mathematics, Operational Research, Statistics
and Information Systems (MOSI) – Transport & Logistics,
Pleinlaan 2, 1050, Brussels, Belgium
E-mail: Philippe.Lebeau@vub.ac.be
E-mail: Olivier.Mairesse@vub.ac.be
E-mail: Cathy.Macharis@vub.ac.be

Abstract: Nowadays, Electric Vehicles (EVs) receive a lot of attention.

However, their market breakthrough is not straightforward. This paper presents
the results of a large-scale data collection (survey with 1196 respondents) held
in Flanders (Belgium). The results include perceptions on the advantages and
disadvantages of Battery Electric Vehicles (BEVs), the acceptable driving
range, the acceptable charging time (both slow and fast), the acceptable
maximum speed, the role of the government in the introduction of BEVs, the
preferred governmental tools to maximise sales and the consumers’
Willingness to Pay (WTP). A second survey was held in order to investigate the
impact of the level of knowledge of the consumers. The results of this second
survey (n = 585) illustrate that knowledge has no impact on the level of
acceptance for the driving range. However, consumers with more knowledge
want a car with a higher maximum speed and desire faster charging durations
(both slow and fast).

Keywords: EVs; electric vehicles; BEVs; battery electric vehicles; PHEVs;

plug-in hybrid electric vehicles; introduction of new technologies; market
potential; introduction barriers.

Copyright © 2013 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.

Consumer attitudes towards battery electric vehicles: a large-scale survey 29

Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Lebeau, K., Van Mierlo, J.,
Lebeau, P., Mairesse, O. and Macharis, C. (2013) ‘Consumer attitudes towards
battery electric vehicles: a large-scale survey’, Int. J. Electric and Hybrid
Vehicles, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp.28–41.

Biographical notes: Kenneth Lebeau received his Masters in Economic

Sciences in 2009 at the Solvay Business School (Vrije Universiteit Brussel &
Université Libre de Bruxelles), after which he started working as a PhD
research associate at the MOBI – Mobility, Logistics and Automotive
technology research group of the Vrije Universiteit Brussel. His research
interests include electric and hybrid vehicles, environmental friendly transport,
vehicle purchase behaviour, taxation systems and evaluation methods.

Joeri Van Mierlo obtained his PhD in Electromechanical Engineering Sciences

from the Vrije Universiteit Brussel in 2000. He is now a full-time Professor at
this university, where he leads the MOBI – Mobility, Logistics and Automotive
Technology research centre (http://mobi.vub.ac.be). He is Visiting Professor
at Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden (2012). He is expert in the field
of electric and hybrid propulsion systems (power converters, energy storage,
energy management, etc.) as well as in the environmental comparison of
vehicles with different kinds of drive trains and fuels (LCA, WTW).

Philippe Lebeau is a Research Associate in the research group MOBI –

Mobility, Logistics and Automotive technology (Vrije Universiteit Brussel).
His PhD focuses on the electrification of the logistic networks with a strong
focus on urban areas. On the basis of his research, he developed a strategic plan
to implement an innovative distribution plan for the Brussels-Capital Region.

Olivier Mairesse, MPsy, PhD, holds a degree in Clinical Psychology

(cum laude, 2002) and obtained his PhD in Psychological Sciences from the
Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB) in 2007. As a post-doctoral fellow, he applied
his expertise in psychological measurement and cognitive decision-making
in the domain of transport economics at the MOSI-Transport and logistics
research department (VUB). Currently he is an Associate Professor at the
Faculty of Psychology & Educational Sciences at the VUB where he lectures
a course on psychophysiological methods and seminars in applied statistics and
psychometrics.

Cathy Macharis is a Professor at the Vrije Universiteit Brussel and Visiting

Professor at the University of Gothenburg. She teaches courses in operations
and logistics management, as well as in transport and sustainable mobility.
Her research group MOBI (Mobility, Logistics and Automotive Technology)
is an interdisciplinary group focusing on sustainable logistics, electric and
hybrid vehicles and travel behaviour. She has been involved in several regional,
national and European research projects dealing with topics such as the location
of intermodal terminals, assessment of policy measures in the field of logistics
and sustainable mobility, electric and hybrid vehicles, etc.
30 K. Lebeau et al.

1 Introduction

1.1 Research background

Environmental challenges force the transportation sector to move to more eco-friendly
technologies. Electric Vehicles (EVs) are regarded as a green transportation solution
(Chan, 2002). The technology behind EVs exists for more than a century (Høyer, 2008).
However, due to the availability and the ease of use of combustion engines, electric
driving was put on hold. Today, different (pushing and pulling) factors recover the
interest in EVs. On the pushing side, the limited oil supply and the rising awareness of
the environmental footprint of conventional combustion engine vehicles lead the way to
cleaner EVs. On the pulling side, recent developments in battery technology and electric
motors make the EVs a valid contester for conventional cars.
Electrified vehicles exist in different formats, based on the degree of electrification of
the drive train and the capacity of the battery (Van Mierlo et al., 2006). In this paper,
the focus is on Battery Electric Vehicles (BEVs). These vehicles have the lowest
environmental impact (Messagie et al., 2010), but require the largest mentality change,
due to some technology bound features.
As with many emerging technologies, the introduction of BEVs in the transport fleet
requires a mentality change of the consumers. This is due to the fact that BEVs have
certain characteristics that differ from conventional vehicles. First, the initial purchase
price of current BEVs is on average 15–30% higher than conventional vehicles. This is
mainly due to the high price of the battery pack. Next, the driving range is limited to
approximately 100–200 km. Higher ranges are possible, but these will again drive up the
price of the BEV. When it comes to charging your BEV, today you have to rely on your
private or semi-private charging station, as public charging infrastructure is still nascent.
Moreover, charging your BEV can take quite some time, depending on the capacity of the
battery and the electricity output of the charging station. Finally, the maximum speed of
BEVs may not satisfy the requirements of some drivers since it is mostly limited to about
130–140 km/h.
In order to facilitate the introduction of electric vehicles, many countries have
initiated large demonstration projects (Lebeau et al., 2010). Here, both electric vehicles
and charging infrastructure are implemented in real-life situations in order to understand
the technical and economical impact on the transport system. This is also the case in
Flanders, the Flemish speaking part of Belgium, where a total financial investment
of around 30 million euro is made, equally divided between the government and the
private sector (Coosemans et al., 2011). The aim of the demonstration projects
is to introduce around 600 new electric vehicles and more than 1000 charging stations
into the market.
Up to August 2011, the Belgian vehicle registration service recorded only 161 electric
vehicles (SPF Economie, 2012). However, during the first three months of 2012, this
number was raised to around 350. In order to promote the purchase of electric vehicles,
the Belgian government launched a financial rebate of 30% of the purchase price of the
electric vehicle, with a maximum of 9190 euro (MINFIN, 2012). However, this financial
incentive was abandoned on January 1st 2013. Belgian citizens can receive a rebate
of 40% when installing a charging station for electric vehicles outside the home
 Consumer attitudes towards battery electric vehicles: a large-scale survey 31

(limited to 250 euro). As for the public charging infrastructure, in April 2012, there were
around 200 stations available in Belgium (ASBE, 2012).
A recent study in Flanders calculated the market potential for BEVs and Plug-in
Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEVs), using a choice-based conjoint analysis (Lebeau et al.,
2012). It is forecast that conventional vehicle technologies (petrol and diesel)
will still dominate market sales for the upcoming years. However, as from 2030, the
market share for newly sold BEVs and PHEVs in Flanders could rise to, respectively,
15% and 29%.

1.2 Research goal and the need for this study

Due to flat roads and travel behaviour of the citizens (mostly short trips), Belgium is an
ideal location for the implementation of electric vehicles. However, the current interest in
EVs is still very low. Kotler et al. (2006) defines four types of buying behaviour, based
on the level of involvement of the consumer and the level of difference between
the different brands. Buying a new car includes a high involvement of the consumer
and the automobile market offers many different brands and vehicle types. Hence,
according to Kotler et al. (2006), buying a new car is situated in the ‘complex buying
behaviour’ area.
In this study, we retrieve insights into this complex purchase behaviour, and more
specifically in the barriers and opportunities of the market introduction of BEVs.
We want to understand consumers’ attitude towards this emerging technology. This
research is necessary at the current stage of the market introduction of BEVs because
there is a lack of recent studies on this topic, which entails a gap in scientific literature.
Hence, we developed a large-scale survey in which Flemish citizens were asked different
questions regarding electric vehicles.

2 Survey design and data collection

A preliminary survey was conducted by personal interviews with visitors of the Brussels
Motorshow (January 2011), people usually in the search stage of their purchase
behaviour. This was done to test the clarity of the questions as well as their relevance and
completeness.
The final survey consisted of 15 multiple-choice questions and was designed to use in
an online, user-friendly environment. In order to augment the response rate, the panel
data of a Belgian market survey company (iVox) were consulted. The target group for the
survey was people older than 18 years (eligible drivers and customers). The area for the
data collection was Flanders, the Flemish-speaking part of Belgium (Figure 1). Between
May 2nd and May 13th 2011, 2037 surveys were distributed. Of which 1196 complete
surveys were returned, entailing a response rate of 58.7%.
Table 1 illustrates the demographic composition of the survey sample. There
was a small bias towards male respondents (56.2%). As for the education level, a small
bias is found towards university college education (30%). Finally, the age and region
distribution are representative of Flanders.
32 K. Lebeau et al.

Figure 1 Research area: Flanders1 (see online version for colours)

Table 1 Demographic composition of the sample

Flanders
Survey (STATBEL, 2012)
N
(number) Percentage Percentage Χ2 φ
Sex
Male 672 56.2 49 Χ2(1) = 20.62 0.14
Female 524 43.8 51
Age
18–25 years 137 11.4 10
26–35 years 182 15.2 15
Χ2(5) = 10,000.20
36–45 years 256 21.4 19 0.30
p < 0.0001
46–55 years 241 20.2 18
56–65 years 263 22.0 16
>65 years 117 9.8 22
Education
No education 22 1.8 19
Primary school 177 14.8 20
Χ2(4) = 307.08
High school/secondary school 456 38.1 33 0.53
p < 0.0001
University college 359 30 18
University 140 11.7 10
Post university 42 3.5 No data available
Region
Antwerp 323 27 28
Limburg 161 13.5 13
Χ2(4) = 4.19
Oost-Vlaanderen 297 24.8 23 0.06
p = 0.3809
Vlaams Brabant 196 16.4 17
West-Vlaanderen 219 18.3 19
Total 1196 100
 Consumer attitudes towards battery electric vehicles: a large-scale survey 33

3 Results and discussion

3.1 Attitudes towards Battery Electric Vehicles

As mentioned before, BEVs have some technology-specific characteristics that differ
from internal combustion engine vehicles. On the basis of the literature, we distinguished
a list of advantages and disadvantages of BEVs (Chéron and Zins, 1997; Morita, 2003;
Lieven et al., 2011; Dijk and Yarime, 2010; Skippon and Garwood, 2011).
In the survey, participants were asked to rate 15 advantages and 14 disadvantages on
a scale of importance. Figure 2 (advantages) and Figure 3 (disadvantages) illustrate the
results. The low cost per kilometre is regarded as the biggest advantage of BEVs. Based
on an electricity price of 0.15 euro per kWh, a BEV with an electricity consumption of
20 kWh/100 km spends 3 euro for 100 km driven. This is relatively low compared with a
modern petrol (6.5 l/100 km, 1.55 euro/l, 10.1 euro/100 km) and diesel (5.5 l/100 km,
1.45 euro/l, 8 euro/100 km) car. Next, the eco-friendly character of BEVs attracts
consumers in buying BEVs. However, the literature (Young et al., 2009; Mairesse et al.,
2011) reveals that there is a so called attitude-action gap between environmental
perception of green vehicles and the actual purchase behaviour of consumers. On third
place we find the possibility to charge the vehicle at home, eliminating the regular visits
to the filling station. The governmental subsidy when purchasing a BEV also attracts
consumers, as well as the possibility to charge at work (given that the employer facilitates
a suitable infrastructure and that a clear agreement on who is paying for the electricity
has been made). At the lower side of the chart, we find some remarkable results.
Acceleration and smart phone applications are perceived as a not important advantage of
BEVs. This is in contrast with other findings (Skippon and Garwood, 2011). This could
be explained by the fact that a few people have experienced the swift acceleration of
BEVs and are unaware of the smart phone applications that are available (battery status
check, personalised battery charging agenda, remote controlled acclimatisation of the
vehicle, etc.).

Figure 2 Advantages of Battery Electric Vehicles

Figure 3 shows that, according to our survey, there are five main disadvantages related to
BEVs. First, the high purchase price is a hurdle that holds back many consumers, not
taking into account the total cost of ownership of the vehicle, which, due to the lower
34 K. Lebeau et al.

running costs, can be more interesting than it first looks. Next, the limited driving range
of BEVs is perceived as a large obstacle for consumers. Even though only 35% of all
Flemish citizens travel more than 40 km per day by car (Cools et al., 2011), consumers
perceive the limitation of around 100–200 km as a struggle. This distance equals
the number of kilometres one can drive when the fuel warning light pops up in a
conventional vehicle. According to the survey, charging the BEV includes three
limitations: there is a lack of public charging infrastructure, it takes too much time to
charge the battery and people who do not own a garage or a private parking space cannot
charge at home. Next are three disadvantages that could change in the upcoming years:
the uncertainty about the residual value, the limited supply of BEV models at car
dealerships and the uncertainty for a new technology. As the electrification of the
transport system continues, all these three limitations are bound to improve.

Figure 3 Disadvantages of Battery Electric Vehicles

Next, the acceptable level of the driving range and the maximum speed of BEVs,
as well as the duration of both slow and quick charging, were questioned. Results are
depicted in Figure 4. Consumers indicate that the current driving range of BEVs
is not acceptable: only 10.4% of the sample is satisfied with a range lower than 200 km.
If, through technological improvements, the driving range would improve to 300 km,
400 km or 500 km, the percentage of satisfied consumers would increase to, respectively,
32.6%, 49.5% and 71.1%. Current BEVs have a maximum speed of around 130 km/h
(Nissan Leaf: 145 km/h; Peugeot iOn, Citroen C-Zero and Mitsubishi iMiev: 130 km/h).
In our survey, the consumers indicate that a driving speed of 140 km/h is sufficient
for 81.9% of the population. Even though modern petrol and diesel vehicles have a
higher maximum speed, the limited maximum speed for BEVs is not perceived as an
important disadvantage. Charging a BEV with a standard plug can take some time.
However, 70.4% of the sample is willing to wait 4–8 h for the battery to recharge
connected to a slow charger. This could be explained by the fact that slow charging is
often related with home charging and night-time charging (Li et al., 2009; Skippon and
Garwood, 2011). However, for fast chargers, often implemented alongside the road
and on highways, consumers are still accustomed to the short time that is needed to fill up
the petrol or diesel tank. A total of 68.8% of the population want fast chargers
to finish within 15 min and 91% want it to finish in less than half an hour. Looking
at today’s fast charger market (30 min for 80% charge), these charging times
 Consumer attitudes towards battery electric vehicles: a large-scale survey 35

could be achieved, be it with a possible negative effect on the battery pack lifetime
(Choi and Lim, 2002).
Charging a BEV can take place at many different locations. According to our survey,
home charging will be dominant (45%). Interesting is that 19% of our sample would like
to charge their BEV at the same location as the conventional filling stations. And 17%
want to charge the vehicle at their working space.
When asking the respondents on the timeframe in which they think a BEV could be a
viable alternative to a conventional car, 3.5% indicated between now and 2 years, 15.1%
indicated between 3 and 4 years, 29.6% indicated between 5 and 6 years, 25.3% indicated
between 7 and 10 years and 26.6% indicated after 10 years.

Figure 4 Consumers’ level of acceptance for driving range, maximum speed and slow/fast
charging time (cumulative %) (see online version for colours)

3.2 Attitudes towards governmental interference and Willingness to Pay

The government plays an important role in the introduction of BEVs (Ahman, 2006).
According to our survey, 71.3% of the respondents think the government
should intervene in the implementation of EVs on the Flemish market. In addition,
Figure 5 illustrates how this intervention should be done. The standardisation of the
charging infrastructure and the installation of fast chargers alongside the road are
top priorities. Today, the standardisation landscape for electric vehicles is still complex
(Van den Bossche et al., 2008). The government should make sure that the market for
electric vehicles agrees on a common charging standard before too many types
have entered the market. Through the installation of fast chargers, the range anxiety
could be lowered and BEV drivers could be allowed to make longer trips. However,
as these charging devices are still very expensive, the government could install the first
basic coverage of fast chargers across the nation. Next in line are three financial
incentives, alleviating the purchase of the BEV and its charging equipment: the
exemption of registration and road tax, a financial incentive when purchasing a BEV and
36 K. Lebeau et al.

a financial incentive when installing a charging station at home. Interesting to see is that
the usage of bus lanes to provide journey time benefits does not attract the respondents of
our survey. This could be caused by the fact that in Flanders bus lanes not yet fully
installed throughout the road network.
Currently, BEVs are on average 15–30% more expensive than a similar conventional
vehicle. Young et al. (2009) found that the price of electric vehicles greatly influences the
consumers’ attitude towards it. If prices would lower, more consumers could become
interested. These price drops could be achieved through economies of scale and mass
production (Cowan and Hulten, 1996).
In our survey, the people who were willing to buy a BEV (n = 1066) were asked
to indicate their WTP for this technology (see Figure 6). Over 50% of the respondents
demand a comparable price tag with current conventional cars. About 27% were willing
to pay more than a conventional car, indicating that a new technology and a green image
should be paid for, whereas 20% think BEVs should be sold at a lower price, mainly
because of its disadvantages such as the limited range and the charging issues. This result
differs from previous research on the WTP for hybrid vehicles (Das et al., 2011).

Figure 5 Governmental intervention for the introduction of BEVs in Flanders

Figure 6 Willingness to Pay for BEVs

3.3 The effect of knowledge on the consumers’ attitudes

In order to better understand how knowledge impacts the consumers’ attitudes, we
conducted a similar questionnaire survey with a different respondent group (n = 585)
in the third quarter of 2011. However, before this second questionnaire survey started, the
respondents watched a 10-min movie on electric vehicles, their characteristics, their
ecological impact and the available charging methods. In both questionnaire surveys,
respondents had to indicate their general level of knowledge on electric vehicles. Table 2
shows that the second respondent group indicated a higher level of knowledge.
 Consumer attitudes towards battery electric vehicles: a large-scale survey 37

The impact on the consumers’ attitudes towards the advantages and disadvantages is
shown in Table 3. Because the question layout differed between both questionnaires, it is
impossible to compare both results directly. However, their ranking can be compared.
Both respondent groups choose the eco-friendliness and the low cost per kilometre as the
main advantages, be it in a reversed order. On third place we find the possibility to charge
at home. On the disadvantage side, the first four disadvantages remain the same. It seems
that the level of knowledge does not affect the consumers’ perception on the advantages
and disadvantages of EVs.

Table 2 Level of knowledge on electric vehicles

First questionnaire Second questionnaire

(n = 1196) (%) (n = 585) (%)
Little to no knowledge 57 30
Basic knowledge 39 60
High knowledge 4 10

Table 3 Impact of knowledge on attitude towards advantages and disadvantages of electric

vehicles

1st questionnaire 2nd questionnaire 1st questionnaire 2nd questionnaire

(n = 1196) (n = 585) (n = 1196) (n = 585)
Ranking of Ranking of Disadvantages
advantages of Advantages of disadvantages of of electric
electric vehicles electric vehicles Percentage electric vehicles vehicles Percentage
Low driving cost Ecofriendliness 36 High purchase price Limited driving 36
range
Ecofriendliness Low driving cost 28 Limited driving High purchase 25
range price
Charge at home Charge at home 13 Lack of charging Long charging 13
infrastructure time
Governmental Driving comfort 8 Long charging time Lack of 9
subsidy (lower sound, charging
swift acceleration) infrastructure
Charge at work Charge at work 7 No charge at home Low EV supply 5
when no garage
Free parking Reserved driving 5 Uncertainty residual Limited top 4
lane and parking value speed
Limited noise – Pioneer of new 3 Low EV supply No charge at 2
comfort technology home when no
garage
Reserved parking Uncertainty new Styling/looks 2
space technology
Reserved driving Not much Noiseless 2
lane information (danger for
available pedestrians)
Entrance to low Limited top speed Uncertainty 1
emission zones new technology
38 K. Lebeau et al.

Table 4 Impact of knowledge on attitude towards advantages and disadvantages of electric

vehicles (continued)

1st questionnaire 2nd questionnaire 1st questionnaire 2nd questionnaire

(n = 1196) (n = 585) (n = 1196) (n = 585)
Ranking of Ranking of Disadvantages
advantages of Advantages of disadvantages of of electric
electric vehicles electric vehicles Percentage electric vehicles vehicles Percentage
No gearbox Noiseless (danger Not much 1
for pedestrians) information
available
Pioneer of new Noiseless (engine)
technology
Acceleration No manual gearbox
Smart phone Styling/looks
applications
Styling/looks

Table 4 illustrates the impact of the level of knowledge on the acceptable driving range,
maximum speed, slow and fast charging duration. Here, both questionnaires were
identical and can thus be compared directly (chi-squared test with α = 0.05). The results
show that there is no significant difference between both samples regarding the level of
acceptance for the driving range (χ = 12.62; df = 7; p = 0.082). Only for the value of
600 km the expected counts for the sample with higher knowledge are significantly
higher than those for the first sample. As for the maximum speed, we find a significant
difference between both samples (χ = 48.21; df = 6; p = 0.000). Hence, consumers with
more knowledge want a car with a higher maximum speed. There is also a significant
difference for the level of acceptability of slow charging (χ = 109.85; df = 7; p = 0.000)
and fast charging (χ = 74.13; df = 6; p = 0.000). People with more knowledge desire
faster charging times. The latter result could be caused by the fact that the respondents
from the second survey learned more about innovative and faster ways of charging the
BEVs in the movie (inductive charging, battery swapping) and hence desire faster
charging times.

Table 5 Impact of knowledge on attitude towards driving range, maximum speed,

slow and fast charging duration

Expected Sample 1 Sample 2 Expected Sample 1 Sample 2

driving range (n = 1196) (%) (n = 585) (%) maximum speed (n = 1196) (%) (n = 585) (%)
100 km 1.4 0.7 80 km/h 0.6 0.2
200 km 8.9 6.3 100 km/h 8.8 5.1
300 km 22.2 20.5 120 km/h 37.4 27.7
400 km 16.9 17.3 140 km/h 35.1 42.9
500 km 21.6 20.0 160 km/h 12.5 20.3
600 km 11.5 15.4 180 km/h 4.5 3.8
700 km 6.2 6.2 180 km/h+ 1.1 0
800 km 11.3 13.6
 Consumer attitudes towards battery electric vehicles: a large-scale survey 39

Table 6 Impact of knowledge on attitude towards driving range, maximum speed,

slow and fast charging duration (continued)

Expected slow Sample 1 Sample 2 Expected fast Sample 1 Sample 2

charging (n = 1196) (%) (n = 585) (%) charging (n = 1196) (%) (n = 585) (%)
<15 min 2.5 2.2 <15 min 34.1 47.5
15 min 0.9 3.8 15 min 34.4 39.1
30 min 3.0 5.0 30 min 22.2 10.8
1h 8.7 12.6 1h 6.4 1.7
2h 14.5 18.6 2h 2.1 0.5
4h 26.3 22.6 4h 0.5 0.3
6h 34.4 15.9 6h 0.2 0
8h 9.7 19.3
Italic figures indicate values that are significantly different from the other sample and
which are largest.

4 Conclusion

The results of our survey (n = 1196) show that the low cost per kilometre, the
environmental performance and the ability to charge at home are perceived as the most
important advantages of BEVs, while high purchase price, limited driving range and
limited charging infrastructure are the most important disadvantages of BEVs. For 49.5%
of the respondents, a range of 400 km is acceptable. The maximum speed of BEVs is not
an issue: 81.9% of the sample is satisfied with a 140 km/h maximum speed, which many
modern BEVs already deliver. We found that 70.4% of the sample is willing to wait 4 to
8 hours for the battery to recharge connected to a slow charger, while 68.8% of the
population wants fast chargers to finish in a maximum of 15 minutes. The government
plays an important role in the introduction phase of BEVs, and, according to our survey,
they should invest in standardisation of the charging infrastructure, the installation of fast
chargers alongside the road and the exemption of taxes (registration and road tax).
Finally, we questioned the WTP for BEVs. Here, only 27% is willing to pay more than a
conventional car.
We conducted a second questionnaire survey (n = 585) in which respondents were
shown a 10 min movie about electric vehicles. These respondents indicated a higher level
of knowledge of EVs. We investigated the effect of this increase in knowledge and
conclude that that knowledge has no impact on the level of acceptance for the driving
range. However, consumers with more knowledge want a car with a higher maximum
speed and desire faster charging durations (both slow and fast).
This study was done in Flanders (Belgium), but results are relevant for other
countries where the potential for electric vehicles is investigated. Future research
could include a comparison of our results with similar studies conducted in other
countries. Different factors such as taxation, sales prices and legislation could have an
impact on the results.
40 K. Lebeau et al.

Acknowledgements

This research was performed in the framework of the “Environmental and market
potential for electric vehicles in Flanders” project, financially supported by the
department of Environment, Nature and Energy (Leefmilieu, Natuur en Energie, LNE) of
the Flemish government.

References
Ahman, M. (2006) ‘Government policy and the development of electric vehicles in Japan’,
Journal of Energy Policy, Vol. 34, pp.433–443.
ASBE (2012) Laadpunten, Available from http://www.asbe.be/nl/laadpunten (Accessed 19 June,
2012).
Chan, C.C. (2002) ‘The state of the art of electric and hybrid vehicles’, Proceedings of the IEEE,
Vol. 90, No. 2, pp.247–275.
Chéron, E. and Zins, M. (1997) ‘Electric vehicle purchase intentions: the concern over battery
charging duration’, Transportation Research Part A, Vol. 31, No. 3, pp.235–243.
Choi, S.S. and Lim, H.S. (2002) ‘Factors that affect cycle-life and possible degradation
mechanisms of a Li-ion cell based on LiCoO2’, Journal of Power Sources, Vol. 111,
pp.130–136.
Cools, M., Declercq, K., Janssens, D. and Wets, G. (2011) Onderzoek Verplaatsingsgedrag
Vlaanderen 4.2.Instituut voor mobiliteit, Brussels, Available from http://www.
mobielvlaanderen.be/pdf/ovg42/ovg42-globaal.pdf (Accessed 19 June, 2012).
Coosemans, T., Lebeau, K., Macharis, C., Lievens, B. and Van Mierlo, J. (2012) ‘Living labs for
electric vehicles in Flanders’, Paper presented at EVS26: The 26th World Battery, Hybrid and
Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle Symposium & Exhibition, 6–9 May, Los Angeles, California,
United States of America.
Cowan, R. and Hulten, S. (1996) ‘Escaping lock-in: the case of the electric vehicle’, Journal of
Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 53 No. 1, pp.63–79.
Das, D., Srinivasan, R. and Dhankar, R.S. (2011) ‘Demand for hybrid car in Indian metro cities’,
International Journal of Electric and Hybrid Vehicles, Vol. 1, No. 3, pp.1–19.
Dijk, M. and Yarime, M. (2010) ‘The emergence of hybrid-electric cars: innovation path creation
through coevolution of supply and demand’, Journal of Technological Forecasting & Social
Change, Vol. 77, pp.1371–1390.
Høyer, K.G. (2008) ‘The history of alternative fuels in transportation: the case of electric and
hybrid cars’, Utilities Policy, Vol. 16, No. 2, pp.63–71.
Kotler, P., Armstrong, G., Saunders, J. and Wong, V. (2006) Principles of Marketing, 4th ed.,
Pearson Education, Essex, England.
Lebeau, K., Macharis, C., Turcksin, L., Van Mierlo, J. and Lievens, B. (2010) ‘Living Labs for
electric vehicles in Europe’, Proceedings EVS25: The 25th World Battery, Hybrid and Fuel
Cell Electric Vehicle Symposium & Exhibition, 3–9 November, Shenzhen, People’s Republic
of China.
Lebeau, K., Van Mierlo, J., Lebeau, P., Mairesse, O. and Macharis, C. (2012) ‘The market potential
for plug-in hybrid and battery electric vehicles in Flanders: a choice-based conjoint analysis’,
Transportation Research Part D, Vol. 17, pp.592–597.
Li, X., Ogden, J.M. and Kurani, K. (2009) ‘An overview of automotive home and neighbourhood
refuelling’, World Electric Vehicle Journal, Vol. 3, pp.1–8.
Lieven, T., Mühlmeier, S., Henkel, S. and Waller, J.F. (2011) ‘Who will buy electric cars?
An empirical study in Germany’, Transportation Research Part D, Vol. 16, pp.236–243.
 Consumer attitudes towards battery electric vehicles: a large-scale survey 41

Mairesse, O., Macharis, C., Lebeau, K. and Turcksin, L. (2011) ‘Understanding the attitude-action
gap: functional integration of environmental aspects in car purchase intentions’, Psicologica,
Vol. 33, pp.547–574.
Messagie, M., Boureima, F., Matheys, J., Sergeant, N., Turcksin, L., Macharis, C. and
Van Mierlo, J. (2010) ‘Life cycle assessment of conventional and alternative small passenger
vehicles in Belgium’, Paper presented at IEEE VPPC Vehicle Power and Propulsion
Conference, 1–3 September, Lille, France.
MINFIN (2012) Belastingvermindering bij aankoop van een elektrisch voertuig of installatie van
een laadpaal, Available from http://www.minfin.fgov.be/portail2/nl/themes/transport/
vehicles-electric.htm (Accessed 19 June, 2012).
Morita, K. (2003) ‘Automotive power source in 21st century’, Journal of Society of Automotive
Engineers of Japan, Vol. 24, pp.3–7.
Skippon, S. and Garwood, M. (2011) ‘Responses to battery electric vehicles: UK consumer
attitudes and attributions of symbolic meaning following direct experience to reduce
psychological distance’, Transportation Research Part D, Vol. 16, pp.525–531.
SPF Economie (2012) Parc de véhicules, Brussels, Belgium, Available from http://
economie.fgov.be/fr/statistiques/chiffres/circulation_et_transport/circulation/parc (Accessed
19 June, 2012).
STATBEL (2012) Directorate-general Statistics and Economic information, Available from
http://statbel.fgov.be/ (Accessed 19 June, 2012).
Van den Bossche, P., Van Mulders, F., Van Mierlo, J. and Timmermans, J-M. (2008)
‘The evolving standardisation landscape for electrically propelled vehicles’, World Electric
Vehicle Journal, Vol. 2, pp.41–48.
Van Mierlo, J., Maggetto, G. and Lataire, Ph. (2006) ‘Which energy source for road transport in the
future? A comparison of battery, hybrid and fuel cell vehicles’, Journal of Energy Conversion
and Management, Vol. 47, pp.2748–2760.
Young, W., Hwang, K., McDonald, S. and Oates, C.J. (2009) ‘Sustainable consumption: green
consumer behaviour when purchasing products’, Journal of Sustainable Development,
Vol. 18, pp.20–31.

Note
1
Source picture based on VIB (http://www.vib.be/en/about-vib/Pages/Living-in-Flanders.aspx).

View publication stats