|Li & Kimura (2021)|TCO per km approach in<br>EVs in ASEAN countries.|Based on TCO per km, the FCEVs are the least<br>competitive option among the alternative powertrains.<br>BEVs appear to be the most competitive, except for<br>passenger vehicles. The TCO per km varies from low<br>US$0.55 in Thailand to high US$0.75 in Malaysia for<br>FCEV passenger cars.|
|---|---|---|
|Mustapa et al. (2020)|TCO analysis is used in<br>Malaysia.|<br>The TCO per km of Nissan leaf (BEV), BMW i3s (BEV),<br>Hyundai Ioniq HEV plus (PHEV), Honda jazz 1.5<br>(PHEV), and Perodua Myvi 1.5 High AT (ICEV) is 1.75,<br>2.5, 1.0, 0.71, and 0.52, respectively, based on 28,188 km<br>over 20 years period. The TCO per km of the BEVs are<br>higher compared with the PHEVs and the ICEV. This<br>implies that the cost of owing EVs in Malaysia is not<br>competitive compared to the HEVs and the ICV.|
|Cox et al. (2020)|TCO analysis is used in<br>Europe.|<br>Vehicles with smaller batteries and longer lifetime<br>distances have the best cost and climate performance. If a<br>very large driving range is required or clean electricity is<br>not available, hybrid powertrain and compressed natural<br>gas vehicles are good options in terms of both costs and<br>climate change impacts. Alternative powertrains<br>containing large batteries or fuel cells are the most<br>sensitive to changes in the future electricity system as their<br>life cycles are more electricity intensive.|
|Nassif & Almeida<br>(2020)|Advanced Vehicle<br>Simulator (ADVISOR) is<br>used.|<br>The costs and fuel economy results of the different<br>configurations (different degree of hybridization, DOH) of<br>FCEV are compared to those of the original vehicle. The<br>configuration with the highest DOH (61.2%) show an<br>8.3% increase in fuel economy and a total cost reduction<br>of 13.2% compared to the original vehicle. In 2019, the<br>purchase price of Nissan Leaf (40 kWh) and Hyundai<br>Ioniq Electric ranges from US$30,000 to 37,000, and<br>Toyota Mirai FCEV costs US$58500.|
|Dreier et al. (2019)|Advanced Vehicle<br>Simulator (ADVISOR) is<br>used in Brazil.|,<br>Analyzing the influence of passenger load, driving cycle,<br>fuel price, and four different types of buses on the cost of<br>transport service for one bus rapid transit route in Curitiba,<br>Brazil, the lowest fuel cost ranges for the passenger load<br>are plug-in (0.198–0.289 US$/km), followed by two axle<br>(0.255–0.315 US$/km), articulated (0.298–0.375US$/km),<br>and conventional (0.552–0.809 US$/km) buses. The<br>capital cost of bus ranges from US$103669 to 276563.|
|Bekel & Pauliuk<br>(2019)|Life cycle assessment is<br>used in Germany.|, ,<br>Considering mid-size vehicles like the VW e-Golf, BEVs<br>have today a better environmental and financial<br>performance than FCEVs. However, the range of the BEV<br>is lower than the range of the FCEV (200km vs 530 km)<br>and both technologies have different stages of maturity.|
|van Velzen et al.<br>(2019)|Literature review and<br>interview methods is<br>used.|<br>The production costs of EVs will go down in the future,<br>but this does not mean that the TCOs of EVs will continue<br>to go down as well. It is argued that EVs are sold at or<br>below production costs. This is a common strategy in the<br>automotive industry, as initial investments are high, and<br>no mark-up is covered by the BEV’s retail price. This may<br>change in the future and BEV retail price may increase to<br>recoup investments. This directly influences the TCO of<br>BEVs in a negative way, suggesting that the ongoing TCO<br>of BEVs in the future may not decrease.|

25