When engineers design environmentally-friendly cars, such as all-electric or hybrid vehicles, they often focus primarily on their technological features. Ricardo Daziano believes they also should consider the "human" element.
By this, he means they need to keep in mind the kinds of things consumers actually want from a "green car," and how these preferences will influence their buying decisions. While technology is important, he believes that engineers no longer can focus on it in isolation. It's not enough to create technically sound solutions if society isn't willing to adopt them.
While many consumers support the concept of sustainable energy cars, this doesn't always mean they will buy them. "This technology often is more expensive, so one question becomes whether consumers are willing to spend a lot of money now for cost-saving benefits that will come later?" he says.
"It's an energy paradox," he adds. "You do have the savings, but they come later. People like to have money now, rather than in savings. It's human nature. It may be difficult to sell the idea that this vehicle costs more now, but will save money in the future."
Daziano, assistant professor in the school of civil and environmental engineering at Cornell University, who teaches economics, has a social science background and believes that technical solutions for society's problems, such as the need for sustainable transportation, must reach beyond the technology into the psyche.
The National Science Foundation (NSF)-funded scientist is studying human behavior and how it relates to consumer decisions about energy efficient, low emission vehicles. His research potentially could provide important insights for policy makers, transportation planners, as well as for automobile manufacturers in advancing future sustainable vehicle designs.
He already has learned, for example, that one of the reasons the Toyota Prius has become so successful is because it is instantly recognizable as a hybrid, unlike those made by other manufacturers which fail to stand out, "Other car makers have hybrids, but they look like their other models," Daziano says. "People want a car that will tell the world: 'I'm green."'
In other preliminary results, he has found that women appear likely to spend up to $2,000 more than men for an energy efficient car.
Daziano is conducting his research under a National Science Foundation Faculty Early Career Development (CAREER) award, which he received earlier this year. The award supports junior faculty who exemplify the role of teacher-scholars through outstanding research, excellent education and the integration of education and research within the context of the mission of their organization. He is receiving $410,000 over five years.
The project is studying data already collected by research centers in Germany, Italy, Canada, and California where scientists conducted consumer surveys asking people about their car buying choices, and how they arrived at them. Daziano is using a special computer algorithm to analyze them.
"I'm trying to determine the tradeoffs people make," he says. "How they process this information. Each car has different characteristics, and I want to see how they combine them to decide on the car they want." Ultimately, "we will be able to forecast how people will react if we make changes in the cars," he adds.
For example, "people may like the idea of a 100 percent electric car, but they still may hesitate to buy one because of its limitations," he says. "All-electric cars have a limited driving range, which is the maximum you can drive in the car, and there is this concept we call 'range anxiety,' when you are concerned that the battery will die and you will not reach your destination. Also, we do not yet have a lot of charging stations available, certainly not like gas stations, which increases the anxiety."
He hopes the information he gathers will influence both auto makers and policy makers. "If I can determine from the point of view of the consumer the optimal driving range that will make them comfortable with an all-electric car, then hopefully the engineers will be able to come up with a battery that offers more," he says.
One research challenge is to find a way to incorporate consumers' wide-ranging and different tastes. "Consumers are heterogeneous," he says. "There are people who prefer luxury cars, others prefer power and space, while others care about color. That's why every car maker has a range of vehicles they offer. They need to address many things in their models.
"If everyone behaved the same, these would be easy problems to solve," he adds.
He already has begun to introduce these ideas into the engineering curriculum, where students "need to understand that we are doing these technologies for people," he says.
"They need to consider people in the design process," he adds. "We are splicing this into discussions in the classroom, for both graduates and undergraduates. They were not aware of this social component of engineering. Modeling consumer preferences is something completely new for engineering students."
Explore further:
Study shows electric cars bring environmental benefits
_ilbud
ryggesogn2
What a concept, making stuff people want to buy!
"The CEO of Fiat Chrysler said he hopes that people don't buy his company's electric car, the Fiat 500e, which he is forced to sell at a loss because of state and federal mandates."
Read more: http://dailycalle...2qFZh0Yx
I like the Leaf, but it requires 20 hours to recharge at home.
antialias_physorg
Try to understand how technology and products are developed. in the early stages of a market you have to make products that work at all. At that time there is no room for frills and customers have to adapt to the product (think about the early days of home computers for example)
The luxury of design comes only later when the product is so cheap/ubiquitous that comfort actually matters as a point of sale.
ryggesogn2
That must be why Japanese cars sell much better than German cars.
The Japanese design for their customers.
The really sad part, from the POV of the US is that it was an American, Deming, who taught them how.
antialias_physorg
Japanese cars sold better because they took advantage of the psychological kink mentioned in the article: People want to save a little money now rather than a lot later.
So japanese manufacturers (in the past) made cars that were cheap to buy and expensive to maintain with exorbitant replacement part prices...while german manufacturers (in the past) made cars that were expensive to buy but so high quality that they wouldn't break.
(The japanese way was like for drug users: "the first one is free, then you're hooked", while the german idea was to give "made in germany" type quality)
Again: This was already WAY past the point when adding frills was possible. In the early days of automobiles they were not so user friendly.
antialias_physorg
Today german cars are just expensive - and have no quality advantage.
(Though there still are some quality standards. Note the failed Daimler-Chrysler venture when it turned out that you just can't make even mediocre quality cars in the US, because the mindset of the american worker is just not up to par. Volkswagen had their own mishap when they tried to move part of their manufacturing to Romania. Same problem. Workers are cheap, but quality dropped through the floor)
The japanese have succesfully integrated worker indentification with their product while keeping production costs low. Though with the standard of living shifting in Japan that is starting to change (note that quality japanese cars are getting progressively more expenisve)
mzso
hangman04
hangman04
ryggesogn2
These features were then designed into the product.
Ingersoll Rand's Cyclone Grinder is a classic case.
When there is real competition, if you don't design products the customer wants, someone else will.
antialias_physorg
There are a few factors beside quality that make up the price of a car (to be sure: "image" is one of those...just look at Apple products).
For the high end cars it's also a matter of economy of scale. When you move to high price sectors you build less cars. But you still have the entire range of ancillary costs (distribution network, advertising, development, safety testing, ...) So the quality increment gets smaller by necessity.
The poor/rich divide is getting bigger. The demand for (up front) cheap cars increases (so does the demand for top of the line luxury vehicles). The middle class is disappearing - and consequently the incentive for making "good products at reasonable prices".
Eikka
There is no paradox because the vehicles don't actually save any money.
If money was the main point, then one could simply buy a cheaper more economical regular car. The new clean hybrids and EVs and other dodads simply cost so much money up-front that they cannot compete with standard cheap cars and/or second hand vehicles even when you discount the fuel prices far ahead into the future.
Call back in 15-20 years when fuel prices have actually doubled and the price of these technologies halved. Then you might have an argument. The green car you buy today will not last you long enough to see the savings realized.
ryggesogn2
Including govt regulations like CAFE standards that force companies to make cars people don't really want to buy.
antialias_physorg
A reason for that could be that companies are trying to recoup their development investments - which were considerably higher for new EVs than for a small increment to their regular vehicles - without knowing how long they can milk that particular cow (if at all). So they try to get their money back as quickly as possible by marketing these vehicles at outrageous prices.
I'd think people would love to buy cars with adequate range and price. Car manufactureres seem to loathe to accept a smaller profit margin, though (and don't forget that most auto-makers are heavily invested in oil companies and vice versa - for obvious reasons. So there is a bit of a conflict of interests going on)
barakn
Yeah, people hate getting good gas mileage. It's not CAFE's fault, it's still the Section 179 business equipment deductions that allow for a $25,000 writeoff on trucks and SUVs over 6000 lbs but only $11,160 for vehicles under that weight. That's what leads to a distorted market.
Eikka
It's not really milking it when you're only selling a handful of units a year. They're mostly doing it to appease the regulators in certain US states that require them to sell some amount of low emission cars in order to have a permission to sell regular cars.
Gas prices aren't really the issue when the US drivers can still afford to drive three times as much with cars that achieve half the average mileage than their European counterparts.
ryggesogn2
Why are fuel prices so high in Euroland?
Here is a car with the customer in mind:
http://www.eliomotors.com/
PPihkala
Here in Finland 95E gasoline is around 1.60 euros per liter. That is almost 8 dollars per gallon. The answer to your question is tax that is about 75% of the price. What kind of car would you drive at 8 dollars per gallon?
ryggesogn2
Who gets the tax?
When I was in Soumi in '83, taxes on cars used for taxis were low or non-existent so most taxis were Volvos and Mercedes.
Taxes on personal cars were high so my friend had a Soviet Fiat. Where does the revenue go?
mzso
The fuel has 75% tax not the cars. Who do you think collects the tax? The state.
Pejico
Jun 01, 2014ryggesogn2
Autos are taxed.
What does the state do with the taxes?
Eikka
A cheap car.
Price of fuel is easiest to offset by reducing the investment cost of the vehicle and driving less, which often means buying second hand cars. People generally don't buy the more expensive hybrids or other hyper-economy cars because they cost more (including specialized maintenance and parts) and the savings are realized only if you drive a lot.
Jantoo
Eikka
The article you reference provides a solution to the very problem, which is using the renewable energy to recycle and reclaim the necessary materials because unlike fossil fuels, the materials in question aren't really consumed in the process of using them.
That of course reduces the effective EROEI of the energy source, which has implications for the rest of the society in terms of what living standards and complexity of society can be sustained (is it enough to sustain the necessary technology itself or will the society collapse?) but that is another open question.