Tag Archives: MimboloveStudy
New research suggests that electric vehicles are a more efficient solution for powering cars than hydrogen. Moreover, the analysis suggests that the cost of creating hydrogen for cars as well as e-fuels could lead to a deeper dependency on fossil fuels.
Although electric propulsion seems to be taking over the automotive world, automakers like Toyota and Porsche are still making a fuss about hydrogen and e-fuels. These can be put directly into existing engines with little to no modifications and are sometimes seen as a way to save internal combustion.
The trouble is that the energy required to make these fuels is still greater than the energy required to power electric vehicles, per the study published in the Nature Climate Change journal. According to Falko Ueckerdt at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany, who led the research, that might lead to a backslide.
Read More: Toyota Modifies A GR Yaris Engine To Run On Hydrogen For Endurance Racing
[embedded content]
“Hydrogen-based fuels can be a great clean energy carrier, yet their costs and associated risks are also great,” Ueckerdt told The Guardian. “If we cling to combustion technologies and hope to feed them with hydrogen-based fuels, and these turn out to be too costly and scarce, then we will end up burning further oil and gas.”
That doesn’t mean that there’s no need to explore hydrogen and e-fuels. In fact, for industries like long-haul trucking and long-distance flight, electric power may never be a suitable solution.
Keeping the majority of vehicles and home heating electric may allow these industries to flourish without overtaxing the electrical grid. According to the research, e-fuels require five times more electricity than EVs, so supplying the industry may in fact require a turn back to fossil fuels.
“We are currently far from 100% renewable electricity,” Romain Sacchi, a member of the study team, told The Guardian. “If produced with the current electricity mixes [in Europe], hydrogen-based fuels would increase – not decrease – greenhouse gas emissions, [compared with] using fossil fuels.”
It’s no secret that buying used can save you money, but is that still true now that used car prices are up?
iSeeCars’ latest study aimed to find out and the answer is unsurprising yes. However, your saving will vary greatly depending on what model you’re in the market for.
According to the study, the average one-year old vehicle costs 17% less than a new one. However, the price difference varies from as little as a 2.1% difference to as much as a 36.4% difference.
Also Read: These Are The Most Popular Used Vehicles In America
The Tesla Model 3 had the smallest price difference as buying a one-year old model will only save customers $923, which is a difference of 2.1%. Following closely behind was the Toyota Tacoma, which is 4.2% cheaper used for a savings of $1,557. Rounding out the top five are the Kia Telluride ($2,456), Ford Ranger ($2,416) and Jeep Gladiator ($3,373). These relatively modest savings mean customers are likely better off buying new.
At the opposite end of the spectrum, some vehicles depreciate like a rock and that means buying used can save you over $20,000. That’s the case with the BMW 5-Series which is 36.4% cheaper used for a saving of $24,207. The Hyundai Sonata is also a one-year old bargain as prices drop 36.1% for a savings of $9,898.
Other models with big savings after a year are the Infiniti Q50 ($16,322), Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross ($8,041) and Ford Mustang Convertible ($13,422). Unsurprisingly, a number of vehicles on the ‘best to buy used list’ are sedans and luxury cars. Sedans have fallen out of favor with crossover obsessed consumers, while luxury vehicles are ripe for depreciation.
In the end, it really comes down to what you want and how flexible you can be. iSeeCars Executive Analyst Karl Brauer also noted, “While buying used typically provides upfront cost savings compared to buying new, sometimes used vehicles only offer minimal savings, especially when finance rates and rebates on new models are taken into account.”
The two slowest-selling new vehicles in the United States are both Mitsubishis, a new study has found.
During a recent analysis of 4.4 million new and used vehicles sold throughout the United States in the period from March through June 2020, it was discovered that the Mitsubishi Outlander and Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross are the slowest-selling new vehicles in the country. On average, it takes 197.7 days for an Outlander and 187.7 days for an Eclipse Cross to sell.
It is hardly a surprise that the Mitsubishi Outlander is so difficult to shift as it has been in production in third-generation guise, with minimal changes, since 2014 and there are many newer and more modern alternatives on the market.
Speaking about it, iSeeCars chief executive Phong Ly said: “The Mitsubishi Outlander compact SUV saw a 76 percent decrease in sales in the second quarter of 2020 compared to 2019, which shows that there isn’t high demand for the vehicle, despite its affordability and unique features like a third-row seat.”
Read Also: Next-Gen Mitsubishi Outlander Will Debut In Early 2021, Go On Sale Shortly Thereafter
It is somewhat of a surprise to see the Eclipse Cross so high up on the list, though, as it is still relatively new. However, like other Mitsubishi models, it is extremely basic and clearly failing to cash-in on demand for SUVs and crossovers in the United States.
The third slowest-selling new vehicle is the Buick Encore with an average sale time of 170 days. It was followed by the Nissan Frontier (158.3 days), Chevrolet Impala (153.1 days), Nissan Altima (151.9 days), Nissan Armada (151.2 days), Cadillac Escalade ESV (151.1 days), Range Rover Velar (150.4 days), and the Infiniti QX60 (149.9 days.)
It sure is not good for car manufacturers to have their new vehicles sitting around for so long. On the flip side, shoppers may find some good savings with such vehicles as dealerships should be eager to get them off their lots.
