Internet Survey Results on the Effects of
Fuel Economy Labels on Understanding
and Selection
SEPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
-------
Internet Survey Results on the Effects of
Fuel Economy Labels on Understanding
and Selection
Transportation and Climate Division
Office of Transportation and Air Quality
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Prepared for EPA by
PRR Inc.
United States
Environmental Protection
^'^1 Agency
EPA-420-R-10-101
November 2010
-------
Internet Survey Results on the Effects of Fuel Economy Labels on
Understanding and Selection
Summary
This report presents the results of a survey conducted on three fuel economy label designs proposed by
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.1
Each respondent saw only one label design and was asked to compare conventional and advanced
technology vehicles based on the information in the presented labels.
The "understanding" questions asked respondents to identify the "better" vehicle for specified trips.
Overall, the differences between the three label designs with respect to understandability are small.
The "selection" questions asked respondents to identify which vehicle s/he preferred to buy, if vehicles
were identical except for the information on the labels. Overall, the vehicle selection differences
between the three label designs are small.
Methodology
Survey question development and pretesting
The survey questions were developed by PRR, Inc. and the EPA, with input from NHTSA (National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration) and OMB (Office of Management and Budget).2 The survey
questions were pretested in seven cognitive interviews.
A total of six different versions of the survey were used. These six versions differed only in regard to:
• Which of the three label designs was presented in the survey
• The order in which the labels were presented in the survey questions (to control for stimulus
order effects)
Sampling and survey implementation
Two sources of new vehicle buyers were used:
• those who requested a price quote from a dealer (Autobytel, http://www.autobytel.com ) and
who indicated that they had purchased a new vehicle (120,000 contacted; response rate < 1%))
1 Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Transportation, "Revisions and Additions to Motor Vehicle
Fuel Economy Labe; Proposed Rule," Federal Register 75(184) (September 23, 2010): 58078-58202.
2 Drafts of the survey were reviewed by Dr. Clay Voorhees of Michigan State University and Dr. Randall Pozdena of
ECONorthwest, former vice president of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.
1
-------
• the e-Rewards™ panel3 of new vehicle buyers (12,025 contacted; response rate about 25%)
The survey was conducted September 8-22, 2010.
Data Management and Analysis
The data from all versions of the survey were merged into one database for analysis purposes. Those
who indicated that they had not purchased a vehicle were dropped from the final database. In addition,
the time that it took respondents to complete the survey was calculated. Any respondent who
completed the survey in less than five minutes was considered to have "blown through" the survey (i.e.,
could not have read/considered the questions carefully enough to provide valid information) and was
dropped. Finally, response range and logic checks were performed in order to identify any miscoded
variables. The final data set for this analysis (n = 3,169) consists of respondents overwhelmingly from
the e-Rewards panel, but it includes some respondents from Autobytel.4 PRR, Inc., conducted the data
analysis, with assistance from ECONorthwest.
A comparison of respondent demographics across the six versions of the survey indicated no statistically
significant differences, except that age for those who viewed the Label 3 design was slightly older than
those who viewed the other two label designs. Respondents came from all fifty states and the District of
Columbia.
The key questions on the survey examined people's "understanding" of the labels and the variation in
"selection" between vehicles when people saw different label designs. For both these kinds of
questions, respondents were shown labels of the same design but for different hypothetical vehicles
(different technology, fuel economy, costs, etc.). In the "understanding" questions, respondents were
asked which vehicle was "better" for a specified distance. The "selection" questions asked which vehicle
the respondent would prefer to buy if all vehicle characteristics other than those on the label were the
same. This memo provides the results of these questions.
3 The e-Rewards panel (part of ResearchNow™ http://www.researchnow.com/) is among the most highly rated of
such online survey panels, and has a global automotive panel of over 1.5 million panelists. Respondents are paid a
small fee ($1.25) for completing surveys. A number of government projects have used e-Rewards panelists,
including but not limited to surveys conducted for the United States Department of Homeland Security and the
United States Department of Defense.
4 The responses include 191 people who self-identified as intending to buy a new vehicle, rather than having
bought a new vehicle. These people came from the Autobytel database, as there were no "intenders" in the e-
Rewards panel. Because intenders were found to be demographically different from buyers (e.g., more male,
older, less wealthy), the intenders were excluded from the analyses presented here. Including intenders might
affect the results, without sufficient numbers of them to identify what effects are associated with intenders vs.
buyers, or to separate the demographic effects from differences in preference between intenders and buyers. The
results presented here thus reflect the preferences only of buyers. Due to omission of an identifier in the e-
Rewards panel responses, the buyers from the Autobytel panel cannot be distinguished from the e-Rewards
panelists. They are likely to be a small enough number that they will not significantly affect the results.
2
-------
The labels presented in the survey are based on hypothetical vehicles and are not intended to reflect the
performance of any specific vehicles. The results of these surveys are not intended to be representative
of any larger group of new vehicle buyers and reflect only the experiences of those who completed the
survey.
3
-------
Topline 'Understanding' Question Results
Respondents' understanding of the labels was tested by showing them a series of label pairs for
hypothetical vehicles (see Appendix 1, Understanding Questions (UQ) 1-6). In each pair, respondents
were asked to identify which vehicle was better to use for trips of specified distances. "Better" was
chosen as the comparison word, rather than "more fuel-efficient" or "less costly," to allow respondents
to decide on their own what information on the label they would use. Answers may therefore reflect
individuals' idiosyncratic attitudes and assumptions; as a result, "incorrect" answers may result for
reasons other than the information on the labels. Because those idiosyncrasies are expected to be
distributed randomly across the label designs, differences in responses across label designs are expected
to be due to the label designs. EPA has chosen to define the objectively "better" answers to these
questions based on fuel cost, fuel economy, GHG emissions, and vehicle range and will identify this as
the "correct" answer for purposes of the discussion below. Responses of "Both are equally good" are
included in the "incorrect" answers.
Below we have presented the results from each label pair, preceded by a brief description of some of
the key metrics shown on each label. Two questions were asked for each label pair: which was "better"
for a short distance (20-30 miles), and which was "better" for a long distance (120 miles).
The results indicate large differences in the proportion of "correct" answers from question to question,
as either the driving distance or the vehicle technologies changed. Limited understanding of advanced
technology vehicles may contribute to incorrect responses to these questions. The differences in
"correct" answers across label designs in response to any individual question are much smaller than the
differences from question to question.
Pair#1
Key Metrics:
• Vehicle A: Gasoline, 30 mpg, $1400 annual fuel cost
• Vehicle B: Electric, range 100 miles, 98 mpge, $616 annual fuel cost
Understanding Q. 1: Which vehicle is better for a round-trip of 30 miles?
Q: Which vehicle is better for a round-trip of 30 miles? * Label Type Crosstabulation
Label 1
Label Type
Label 2
Label 3
Total
Which vehicle is better Vehicle A
for a round-trip of 30
miles?
Count
% within Label Type
177
20.0%
89
11.6%
Vehicle B
Count
% within Label Type
622
70.1%
602
78.4%
Both are equally good
Total
Count
% within Label Type
Count
% within Label Type
9.9%
887
100.0%
77
10.0%
768
100.0%
96
9.1%
873
83.1%
81
7.7%
1050
100.0%
362
13.4%
2097
77.5%
246
9.1%
2705
100.0%
4
-------
The "correct" answer is B, due to the higher efficiency and lower operating costs of the electric vehicle.
In this comparison, regardless of label design, respondents gave a high proportion of "correct" answers.
Average "correct" response was 77.5%, with the proportion of "correct" responses across label designs
varying from 70% to 83%.5
Understanding Q. 2: Which vehicle is better for a round-trip of 120 miles?
Q: Which vehicle is better for a round-trip of 120 miles? * Label Type Crosstabulation
Label 1
Label Type
Label 2
Label 3
Total
Which vehicle is better Vehicle A
for a round-trip of 120
miles?
Count
% within Label Type
468
51.5%
402
52.4%
Vehicle B
Count
% within Label Type
378
41.6%
308
40.2%
Both are equally good
Total
Count
% within Label Type
Count
% within Label Type
62
6.8%
908
100.0%
57
7.4%
767
100.0%
512
48.2%
483
45.5%
67
6.3%
1062
100.0%
1382
50.5%
1169
42.7%
186
6.8%
2737
100.0%
The "correct" answer is A, because the range for the electric vehicle is less than the trip distance.
In this comparison, all three labels produced a large proportion of "incorrect" answers compared to the
answers for the 30-mile range. Average "correct" response is 50.5%, with the proportion of "correct"
responses across label designs varying from 48% to 52%.6
Pair #2
Key Metrics:
• Vehicle A: Extended-range electric (EREV):
o All-electric: range 30 miles, 90 mpge, $672 annual fuel cost
o Extended range: 32 mpg, $1,313 annual fuel cost
• Vehicle B: Plug-in hybrid electric (PHEV):
o Blended: range 30 miles, 65 mpge, $734 annual fuel cost
o Extended range: 54 mpg, $778 annual fuel cost
Understanding Q. 3: Which vehicle is better for a round-trip of 20 miles?
5 Statistically significant: Cramer's V = .132, p = .000
6 Statistically not significant: Cramer's V = .037, p = .154
5
-------
Q: Which vehicle is better for a round-trip of 20 miles? * Label Type Crosstabulation
Label 1
Label Type
Label 2
Label 3
Total
Which vehicle is better Vehicle A
for a round-trip of 20
miles?
Count
% within Label Type
354
38.9%
395
52.1%
Vehicle B
Both are equally good
Count
% within Label Type
Count
% within Label Type
322
35.4%
233
25.6%
202
26.6%
161
21.2%
488
46.3%
290
27.5%
275
26.1%
1237
45.5%
814
29.9%
669
24.6%
Total
Count
% within Label Type
909
100.0%
758
100.0%
1053
100.0%
2720
100.0%
The agencies identified the "correct" answer as A since both vehicles will operate in the mode using
electricity, and the EREV is more fuel-efficient and less costly to operate in that range.
In this comparison, all three labels produced a large proportion of "incorrect" answers. Average
"correct" response is 45.5%, with the proportion of "correct" responses across label designs varying
from 39% to 52%.7
Understanding Q. 4: Which vehicle is better for a round-trip of 120 miles?
Q: Which vehicle is better for a round-trip of 120 miles? * Label Type Crosstabulation
Which vehicle is better Vehicle A
for a round-trip of 120
miles? Vehicle B
Both are equally good
Count
% within Label Type
Count
% within Label Type
Count
% within Label Type
Label 1
223"
25.0%
470
52.6%
200
22.4%
Label Type
Label 2
176
23.2%
457
60.3%
125
16.5%
Label 3
3t4"
30.0%
570
54.4%
164
15.6%
Total
713
26.4%
1497
55.5%
489
18.1%
Total
Count
% within Label Type
893
100.0%
758
100.0%
1048
100.0%
2699
100.0%
The "correct" answer is B, based on a weighted average of fuel costs for the two modes that would be
used over the distance. The PHEV's gasoline mode is sufficiently more efficient than that for the EREV to
outweigh the higher efficiency of the EREV for the mode using electricity.
In this comparison, all three labels produced a majority of "correct" answers. Average "correct"
response is 55.5%, with the proportion of "correct" responses across label designs varying from 53% to
60%.8
Pair #3
Key Metrics
• Vehicle A: Extended-range electric (EREV):
7 Statistically significant: Cramer's V = .104, p = .000
8 Statistically significant: Cramer's V = .062, p = .005
6
-------
o All-electric: range 40 miles, 90 mpge, $672 annual fuel cost
o Extended range: 54 mpg, $778 annual fuel cost
• Vehicle B: Electric, range 90 miles, 119 mpge, $508 annual fuel cost
Understanding Q. 5: Which vehicle is better for a round-trip of 30 miles?
Q: Which vehicle is better for a round-trip of 30 miles? * Label Type Crosstabulation
Which vehicle is better Vehicle A
for a round-trip of 30
miles? Vehicle B
Both are equally good
Count
% within Label Type
Count
% within Label Type
Count
% within Label Type
Label 1
19cT
20.9%
521
57.4%
196
21.6%
Label Type
Label 2
125
16.4%
497
65.3%
139
18.3%
Label 3
26fT
19.8%
623
59.8%
213
20.4%
Total
521
19.2%
1641
60.6%
548
20.2%
Total
Count
% within Label Type
907
100.0%
761
100.0%
1042
100.0%
2710
100.0%
The "correct" answer is B, due to the greater efficiency and lower operating cost for the electric
vehicle.
In this comparison, all three labels produced a solid majority of "correct" answers. Average "correct"
response is 61%, with the proportion of "correct" responses across label designs varying from 57% to
65%.9
Understanding Q. 6: Which vehicle is better for a round-trip of 120 miles?
Q: Which vehicle is better for a round-trip of 120 miles? * Label Type Crosstabulation
Which vehicle is better Vehicle A
for a round-trip of 120
miles? Vehicle B
Count
% within Label Type
Count
% within Label Type
Both are equally good
Count
% within Label Type
Label 1
42sT
48.2%
329
37.0%
132
14.8%
Label Type
Label 2
411
54.2%
272
35.9%
75
9.9%
Label 3
46sT
45.1%
477
45.9%
94
9.0%
Total
1309
48.7%
1078
40.1%
301
11.2%
Total
Count
% within Label Type
890
100.0%
758
100.0%
1040
100.0%
2688
100.0%
The "correct" answer is A, because the range for the electric vehicle is shorter than the trip length.
In this comparison, all three labels produced a large proportion of "incorrect" answers. Average
"correct" response is 49%, with the proportion of "correct" responses across label designs varying from
45% to 54%.10
9 Statistically significant: Cramer's V = .064, p = .004
10 Statistically significant: Cramer's V = .074, p = .001
-------
What parts of the label did respondents use?
Respondents were then asked what parts of the label they had used in making their choices. Based on
the table below, the following three metrics were used most often:
• Fuel economy (especially on labels 3 and 2)
• Vehicle range (especially on labels 2 and 3)
Gasoline and/or electricity consumption (similarly on all labels)
Q: What label information did you use in deciding which vehicle you would purchase in the previous questions?
(Multiple responses allowed; Percents add up to more than 100%)
Label Type 1
Label Type 2
Label Type 3
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Gasoline and/or electricity consumption
416
38.6%
338
38.7%
481
42.7%
Gasoline and/or electricity cost
220
20.4%
291
33.3%
307
27.2%
Environmental impact
88
8.2%
86
9.8%
144
12.8%
Vehicle range
464
43.0%
490
56.1%
651
57.8%
Rating information
172
16.0%
144
16.5%
176
15.6%
Fuel economy
553
53.1%
551
63.0%
769
68.2%
Regression results (presented in Appendix 2) provide these additional observations.
Explanatory variables that tended to increase the likelihood of identifying the "correct" answer include:
Fewer than 5 licensed drivers in the household
Being male
Not being the fastest adopter of new technology
More education
Having 5 or more household vehicles
These results, with the exception of "Male," are inconsistent across the regression results: that is, they
are not statistically significantly different from zero for all the questions.
The classes of vehicles people considered buying appear to have some explanatory power as well. For
instance, people who considered purchasing compact cars appear to have a higher likelihood of
answering "correctly." These vehicle class variables may be serving as proxies for some personal
characteristics not picked up in the other demographic variables.
8
-------
Topline 'Selection' Question Results
To test whether the labels produced variation in people's selections of vehicle purchases, respondents
saw pairs of labels for hypothetical vehicles (see Appendix 1, Selection Questions (SQ) 1-4). They were
asked:
Assuming the same make and model of vehicle for both labels above and assuming that both
vehicles met all your other requirements (including size, reliability, comfort, performance,
appearance, and safety) and are identical in purchase price, which vehicle would you purchase
when you consider your typical travel pattern?
Because driving patterns of respondents were distributed randomly across the label designs,
differences in responses across label designs are expected to be due to the label designs. In these
questions there is no correct answer. Respondents identify their preferred vehicles based on their own
decision factors.
In all four comparisons, the majority of respondents selected the vehicle with projected higher fuel cost
savings or lower fuel costs. Those who saw either Label 1 or (in 2 of the 4 regressions) Label 3 chose the
vehicle with lower projected fuel costs and higher fuel savings more often than those who saw Label 2.
Regression results in Appendix 2 show that, in 3 of the 4 comparisons, respondents who drove fewer
miles per day had a greater tendency to select the vehicle with a lower-cost short range. This result
suggests that people did think about daily driving patterns when making their choices.
Below we have presented the results from each label pair, preceded by a brief description of some of
the key metrics shown on each label.
Pair#1
• Vehicle A: Gasoline, 46 mpg, $913 annual fuel cost
• Vehicle B: Extended-range electric:
o All-electric: range 20 miles, 98 mpge, $618 annual fuel cost
o Extended range: 28 mpg, $1,500 annual fuel cost
Selection Q. 1:
Q: Assuming the same make and model of vehicle for both labels above and assuming that both vehicles met all your
other requirements (including size, reliability, comfort, performance, appearance, and safety) and are identical in purchase
price, which vehicle would you purchase when you consider your typical travel pattern? * Label Type Crosstabulation
Label Type
Label 1
Label 2
Label 3
Total
Which vehicle would you
Vehicle A
Count
631
434
637
1702
purchase when you
consider your typical
travel pattern?
% within Label Type
69.8%
57.9%
61.8%
63.4%
Vehicle B
Count
% within Label Type
157
17.4%
224
29.9%
258
25.0%
639
23.8%
Equally likely to
Count
116
91
135
342
purchase either vehicle
% within Label Type
12.8%
12.1%
13.1%
12.7%
Total
Count
904
749
1030
2683
% within Label Type
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
9
-------
In this comparison, regardless of label design, most respondents chose the conventional gasoline engine
vehicle. Average proportion choosing the gasoline vehicle is 63%, with the proportion choosing the
gasoline vehicle across label designs varying from 58% to 70%.11
Regression results for this comparison (see Appendix 2) suggest the following factors tend to increase
the likelihood of choosing the gasoline vehicle:
A larger share of highway driving
Being slow to adopt new technologies
Pair #2
• Vehicle A: Gasoline, 28 mpg, $1,500 annual fuel cost
• Vehicle B: Electric, range 85 miles, 123 mpge, $490 annual fuel cost
Selection Q. 2:
Q Assuming the same make and model of vehicle for both labels above and assuming that both vehicles met all your
other requirements (including size, reliability, comfort, performance, appearance, and safety) and are identical in purchase
price, which vehicle would you purchase when you consider your typical travel pattern? * Label Type Crosstabulation
Label Type
Label 1
Label 2
Label 3
Total
Which vehicle would you
Vehicle A
Count
229
234
267
730
purchase when you
consider your typical
travel pattern?
% within Label Type
25.3%
31.4%
25.9%
27.2%
Vehicle B
Count
% within Label Type
612
67.7%
446
59.8%
690
67.0%
1748
65.2%
Equally likely to
Count
63
66
73
202
purchase either vehicle
% within Label Type
7.0%
8.8%
7.1%
7.5%
Total
Count
904
746
1030
2680
% within Label Type
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
In this comparison, regardless of label design, most respondents chose the electric vehicle. Average
proportion choosing the electric vehicle is 65%, with the proportion choosing the electric vehicle across
label designs varying from 60% to 68%.12
Regression results for this comparison (see Appendix 2) suggest the following factors tend to increase
the likelihood of choosing the electric vehicle:
Being under age 65
Driving less than 70 miles on a daily basis
Ranking the fuel economy label very highly in the decision process
Pair #3
• Vehicle A: Extended-range electric (EREV):
o All-electric: range 32 miles, 89 mpge, $679 annual fuel cost
o Extended range: 31 mpg, $1,355 annual fuel cost
• Vehicle B: Electric, range 80 miles, 121 mpge, $501 annual fuel cost
11 Statistically significant: Cramer's V = .084, p = .000
12 Statistically significant: Cramer's V = .050, p = .009
10
-------
Selection Q. 3:
Q: Assuming the same make and model of vehicle for both labels above and assuming that both vehicles met all your
other requirements (including size, reliability, comfort, performance, appearance, and safety) and are identical in purchase
price, which vehicle would you purchase when you consider your typical travel pattern? * Label Type Crosstabulation
Label Type
Label 1
Label 2
Label 3
Total
Which vehicle would you
Vehicle A
Count
353
334
359
1046
purchase when you
consider your typical
travel pattern?
% within Label Type
39.0%
45.0%
35.0%
39.1%
Vehicle B
Count
% within Label Type
475
52.5%
324
43.7%
548
53.4%
1347
50.4%
Equally likely to
purchase either vehicle
Count
% within Label Type
77
8.5%
84
11.3%
120
11.7%
281
10.5%
Total
Count
905
742
1027
2674
% within Label Type
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
In this comparison, there is more of an even split between the two vehicle types, with half overall
choosing the Electric Vehicle (50%) and another 11% indicating that they would be equally likely to
purchase either vehicle. Average proportion choosing the electric vehicle is 50%, with the proportion
choosing the electric vehicle across label designs varying from 44% to 53%.13
Regression results for this comparison (see Appendix 2) suggest the following factors tend to increase
the likelihood of choosing the electric vehicle:
Having 1 vehicle in their household
Driving less than 70 miles on a typical day
Pair #4
• Vehicle A: Extended-range electric:
o All-electric: range 30 miles, 90 mpge, $672 annual fuel cost
o Extended range: 32 mpg, $1,313 annual fuel cost
• Vehicle B: Plug-in hybrid electric:
o Blended: range 30 miles, 65 mpge, $734 annual fuel cost
o Extended range: 54 mpg, $778 annual fuel cost
Selection Q. 4:
Q: Assuming the same make and model of vehicle for both labels above and assuming that both vehicles met all your
ther requirements (including size, reliability, comfort, performance, appearance, and safety) and are identical in purchase
price, which vehicle would you purchase when you consider your typical travel pattern? * Label Type Crosstabulation
Label Type
Label 1
Label 2
Label 3
Total
Which vehicle would you
Vehicle A
Count
210
164
262
636
purchase when you
consider your typical
travel pattern?
% within Label Type
23.3%
22.0%
25.4%
23.7%
Vehicle B
Count
532
450
593
1575
% within Label Type
59.0%
60.5%
57.5%
58.8%
Equally likely to
Count
160
130
177
467
purchase either vehicle
% within Label Type
17.7%
17.5%
17.2%
17.4%
Total
Count
902
744
1032
2678
% within Label Type
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
13 Statistically significant: Cramer's V = .069, p = .000
11
-------
In this comparison, regardless of label design, most respondents chose the Plug-in Hybrid Electric
Vehicle (PHEV). Average proportion choosing the PHEV is 59%, with the proportion choosing the PHEV
across label designs varying from 58% to 61%.14
Regression results for this comparison (see Appendix 2) suggest the following factor tends to increase
the likelihood of choosing the PHEV:
Higher proportion of highway miles
What parts of the label did respondents use?
Respondents were then asked what parts of the label they had used in making their purchase selections.
Based on the table below, the following four metrics were used most often:
• Fuel economy (especially on labels 3 and 2)
• Vehicle range (especially on labels 2 and 3)
• Gasoline and/or electricity cost (especially for label 3 and 2)
• Gasoline and/or electricity consumption (especially for label 3)
Q: What label information did you use in deciding which vehicle you would purchase in the previous questions?
(Multiple responses allowed; Percents add up to more than 100%)
Label Type 1
Label Type 2
Label Type 3
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Gasoline and/or electricity consumption
418
38.8%
359
41.1%
539
47.8%
Gasoline and/or electricity cost
362
33.6%
411
47.0%
552
49.0%
Environmental impact
113
10.5%
131
15.0%
238
21.1%
Vehicle range
439
40.7%
460
52.6%
594
52.7%
Rating information
210
19.5%
202
23.1%
278
24.7%
Fuel economy
571
53.0%
563
64.4%
742
65.8%
14 Statistically not significant: Cramer's V = .023, p = .569
12
-------
Appendix 1 -
Labels Used in the Surveys -
-------
UQ1 & UQ2: -
Label Type 1 -
Vehicle A:
EPA
DOT
h:i,M h-jononiy -juti
Environmenti)! Cnmpmisnti
! ».};•! .J
website,here
saves *3,000
Gasoline Vehicle
in fuel costs
compared to the
average vehicle.
Gallon*'
100 Miles
3.3
MPS
City
27
um
Highway
35
COifimite
295
Annual
cost
$1,400
EB ^
Combed
C^aimrte
Otfi* Aw Pollutants
• Fuii «coht>my for ail mMmm cars ranges from 29 to 133
MPG>-..Thv.vu.ni. MPG.iqu.v.-.icii.?: 33,7 kW-hrs 1 gallon gasoline energy,
* Annual lues I cost ba««d on 15,000 miles p#r year at $2 JO psr
<3»l|Or>.
Visit ymb&ii£>.hf*m%Q ealcyteie estimates
p-efso-naliz&d for your driving, and to
dowoioad the Fy#l Eeenoftiy Gmii,v* •-«!: 2 3s ? fcW-iirs * 1 gallon gasoline energy
• Annual -fuel cost based on 15,000 miles- per year at 12 cants per kVV-hr.
Visit w&bmtejmmta calculate estimates
personalized for your driving, and to
download the fuel Economy Guide{also
avaiiabfeai dealers).
-------
Vehicle A:
EPA Fuel Economy and
DOT Environmental Comparisons
»30"7«
combined crty/hwy caty highway
M Gasoline Vehicle
3.3
gallons used every 100 miles
Annual Fuel Cost
«1,400
How This Vehicle Co m pares
Among all vehicles and within midsize cars
Worst
I Environment
Grecnhauso HTM
Gkik iMfl ^ MsSw
I® Best
n>i MPG equivalent
«/0 102 94
combined city/hwy city highway
Electric Vehicle
34
kW-rtrs per 100 miles
Annual Electric Cost
$616
Charge & Range
j "~|jl 5'lar!lsfill a fully charged battery-, vehicle can travel atom,,.
iSr Itnours »
Smartphone 0 MS III
Interactive N'iiJ m-,
Scan, code few mare
information about this plj
I valBCtawio coiiipar-e r—1
-------
Vehicle A:
EPA Fuel Economy and
DOT Environmental Comparisons
Fuel Economy
MPG
Consumption
$1,400
annual fuel cost
3 0 gallons used
¦ J every ICO miles
Fuel Economy & Greenhouse Gas Rating
30
combined
27 35
city highway
larriong all vehicles!
nvcaijci «>r?
Fuel >?wnn)rrv fu r all midsize i^rs ranees frqir 20 ttj 123 MPGsquWiiart.
Vriir %rlu»|mili>agA wir cr*N uril raryuwfh lii.»l -trinirtij rnptrllirn*, Jt inH hrmiyim
dnraanfll mint ail ywrveiicto Cost are towed ontfj000 rriies par ygwrat
SZSDperflifcllcn.
Vis ft www.fyel@conoiTiY.g Qv
• Ui cu ai« per^nailzsd driving esil naces
* Duwnlucd iitrFutfl Ecuiomy Quids
j.abo avail able at dealers}
Environment Rating
{among a I veh clraj
295
Utlier A r KjIIUI
25 qj4 of EjSta L-j-Jti
CO,
granMilmi'e
{tailpipe only!1
Smaiiphone
Interactive
Scan code for more
inlormau&fi aawii Bus
vehide or to compare
il willi ij.I iw t>.
0)
cr
m
<
"O
fD
UJ
Vehicle B:
EPA Fuel Economy and
DOT Environmental Comparisons
Fuel Economy Consumption
AMPGequlvalem
"o
102 94
combined citv highway
$616
annual fuel cost
0/| kW-hrs per
Of 100 miles
Fuel Economy & Greenhouse Gas Rating
{am ang all vehicles)
SB
: 1
» 1 « 1 7 I . | . \W
m
¦P
eoia
Fuel economy for ttll mlctel&J cars ranges fttjrni 20 K3 22 fWFG-neuiwaiir-.i.
Viuai arfiuil mild ago ami rrk -aee fcasatf on '5,C0$rme$per
ysarat l>2 certs per
-------
UQ3 & UQ4: -
Label Type 1 -
Vehicle A:
EPA Fun! E conomy and
DOT Environmental Coir
mm®
Over five years, this vehicle
saves $5,100
gaamn—
ir. f J»j:i CCSti
co sparse! :o tae
3'--e-.'dqe
37 30 3.1
ei ^ o a
32 131
IB— ¦
$973
^13
fu
iom v for all midsize cars runu-as irorn 20 to 123
MPG»i».iiv.ijant. MPCi.:«iiiv4k:.v; 33.7 kW-hrs 1 gallon gasoiin-e energy
« /sm:ut'_e; cc:a; b.-.£o :1 c n !~.,&00 miles per year at $2.00 per gallon
and 1 7. c<»nH~ p«*r k"W- h r
V v i iestimates
P €?"5 •' '".vrl I r:
..it fit-:-j!S;
mm®
Vehicl
EPA
DOT
Fuel Economy and
Environmenta I Compa rison
3r^E]
sSf
""J ""
iBBBBlllBllBBIBl
Ova' five years, this vehicle
saves *6,200
n fuel costs
compared to the
jverage vehicle
Dua! Fuel Vehicle: Piuy ill ItYbriil £l»:tii<.
1.5 65 I 1.9
El [;+'j o O
125 J $755
El V i3
• fuel economy for all rnids??# cars ranges from 20 to 123
MPCitouivau-.v MPG^::.mv,v;ci:: 33.7 fcW-hra 1 gallon gas-oiin® energy.
* A;:!';j.,1 "yd cos: b^-:-5d lv.DOC regies per year at $2,80 per gallon
arm 12 cants per kW-hr.
'•'¦•Mi ^ r.j- ic. c .1 i u I i-i I £ i-n'i-.ifei
17-rd !-:*r y^ur dfiv r*-:i 1c.
Ihu F«:•:->ri:si!''• 'I i;.¦ Jc- Iijwjgi
available al dealers}
mm®
-------
Vehicle A:
EPA Fuel Economy and
DOT Environmental Comparisons
~ Dual Fuel Vehicle:
ft Gasoline-Electricity
All Electric
When baufiiv is fully mUeaanly'-
90
ptwwbirxmd city.'hwy
$672
R5
M P G equ i wa lent
« # kW-hrs par
coil por year If
A|i E&Ptric
Gas Only
Wli«i etemdty Is ui&.l up. vehleta tuns <&a (jaa.
~> ^ MPG
Wfc 3.1 &rr
•uombinad r.\ ly/liwy
$1,313
toil pe»r year ¦(
mcde
Charge & Range I
l-'liar0*1,111 * All Electric Range I battery j Extended Range (gas)
t IB 4 hour* omiUd iQ 20 30 m 30 e
50 SOfl *
How This Vehicl e Compares
Among all vehicles arid within midsize cars
Worst £j|
w
midsi*ft cars
ES
I
Environment
(Ea MjMgnk
tuSm T
Greenhouse i
ICO2 flftnile, tailpipe onfy)
Your actual mi Image and costs wil I va ry with (ue I cost, tern perature. drwi no conditions, »nd how you
drive and maintain your vehicle. Cos* estimates-are baud on TB,044 miles per year at $2.80 perflation
and 12 cants per kW-ftr MPGequivaleM:: 33.7 k#-ftrs = I gaillori oasollrve erv&rgy.
Visit www- fueleconom y.gov to cailcuhate> estim ate s / i \
persona Ii2frdfok y&ur driving, and! to downlead th« jMi \ lv J
Fuel Economy Guide (also available at dealers).
Smart phone
Interactive
Scan code for more
information abort ttiia
I velicte or to cum tare
Vehicle B:
su
O"
m
•<
T3
ffi
N»
EPA Fuel Economy and
DOT Environmental Comparisons
Electric -1- Gas
Whan batter v la fully ehMflH&t fir-ii 30 mites arily.
MPG equivalent
lOO 1.5S"
ccimb in«ci c ily.'hwy
$734
-Cy
Charge & Range
—i__i ufiange time Blended Electric + Gas Range (l>attervl
\ ill hours oVnilaa 10 M 30 ' «
: Dual Fuel Vehicle:
I A Gasoline-Electricity
Gas Only
Whfert ItfoElrtelty i* u-Sed Up. VfihlCfe Hi ft 5 M
MPG
ft54
-::nmt>iHcid nlyi'hwy
$778
1,9 ?eotnfw
cast per year 11
always run tn
<5^ Only rnwffl
Tr
Extended Range (gasl VrtWri*
53 ED 7B HQ 30 KM O ®
How This Vehicle Compares
Among all vehicles and within midsize cars
Worst
m ^ m
| Environment %§£rm&y<
Best
Grc-cnhouse g
Gssm
(COi gi'mile, tailpipe c>n!vl
midsize cars
Other Air
PoHutunii
m ?_»
Ywr actual m ileage and co*t« will vary wi ih f uel cost, tean p erasure. drivin 0 conditions, and how yoti
drive and maintain your vehicle. Cost astimatesare based on 1&,00
-------
Vehicle A:
EPA Fuel Economy and
DOT Environmental Comparisons
All Elsctrlc
iwiiAn fu ly >Ti.a'Gea?
90
[A bojrc
MPGequvfileit
3*7 kW-hr*
O / pr!f 103 rn i
3h#rg? tafce* Rwtge
30 miles fee'ort
switdwra to GasMcdo
Gas Only ""-C-J"
when wne-ryis empty"!
32
W1PG
31
. I prr 1D0 n
Annual Fuel Cost
$973
All Electric and
Gas; Only combined
Fuel Economy & Greenhouse Gas Rating
farrorq all vehicesl
5 [ S I 7 I el
VHP
ITIftdJtJf CJIfS
9
UVI C^VIIVKIf IV! 3 I I IIIUPK-V
jefcide H&ts MPGgcuivateH.
Environment Rating
(among all vehidesl
131
COj
lc
|lail pip4 only!
Oilier Air Pollutant:-
~~~~
4 out or E IE i» bsal!
^^>SnrurfAt?y"
Visit wwvu.f#elecor» ©wy.gov
• Calculate pfcrsonaiiffid drtvtrg e&imaias
• Download ne Fual Economy Qulce
(also jjvaiublesrt tteilcs)
Smartphr>n» [31 ATS fill
Interactive ^ £ »jjl ^
!var wdefflfnwn? Jvf/V1'
ir/nmn^tinn nhnilthR JEwPt"
vehicle or to compare [Win
it l «o«t* iMll vary with fu»l cost. Ump&*ature. drl^nria condition*. and how
VOj d*iVB and na nial»your \ehiele. Cosifiatlrrawa are uasedofi 16-003 wiles par veer a".Si.BO
pe* gallon and I2cetusp«< kW-l'r MPGequlvalervt 33.7 fcWhr* -1 gallon ijafollffce sriMgv.
SB
u-
fO
<
T3
jival«nt
gallon y-as
. O cerlOOmilRS
Ct&rjQ ial>c Fan3<>
30 rniies hefo'e
iwltcl'ilr^ to Z-*t Mbd»
EIhMmi, pnh- f iM 11
65
i'l
hotWi I
Gas Only -cr
Iwtwn baroary tserrptY?
54
MPG
1Q gallenj
¦ 3 pwlOOr
Annual Fuel Cost
$755
Blended and
Gas Only combined
Fuel Economy & Greenhouse Gas Rating
(ano'tq all vehicles)
9
* B [ 6 1 7 | -, I ~[ K
nidss^ca^s
ftel econwrny for all midsize tars ranpesfrom 20to 123 MPGeauivatent.
This vehice gels 60 MPGequivatent,
B
Environment Rating
anong all vehicle^
125
cc3
gro'ria'milc
I'.arbi pe oily I
Other WrPtrilutiHUS
irkifi
3.5-Ou. o4 5 |5 •> beat|
<£Cb ksu m
Visit www.fueieconomy.gov
• Calculate persoralired drivng esliiraws
• Download ;h€ Fuel Economy de for more
infrrmntnn.ahiir iH*;
whcle or to compare Irl'Jw
i1 vwth ethers, pjT[
Vow ae-u»l robtaag* ard co-etc will wary wit-* luol eort, l»rnpacatjr«v •Jnvi'Hj :sndrtlons, and r>«w
yuu dme £ndrnaiir.a:ir your vehicle. Cost e)Um«tesare baied oi 15.030 mlias year at £2.®
par gallon and 12 cents pet kW nr.MPQequ va eit: ffl.7 kW-h'a - 1 pllo*1 gasolne arerqy
-------
UQ5 & UQ6: -
Label Type 1 -
Vehicle A:
Mm
EsSi
The abme flratle reflects fuel
economy and greenhouse gases.
Grading system ranges from A+ to D.
i ». r
[fe:
website, hem
Over five years, this vehicle
saves $6,400
Uuiil f uel Volutin:
in fuel costs
compared to the
average vehicle,
37 90 1.9
H 5 ¦ ¦_
S4 62 S712
V 11 51 ^13
Cg system range# from At to 0
fil&Yifi]
3
wehsitehere
Over five years, this vehicle
saves $ 7,5 00
Lk'ctni Vuhiclo
in fuel costs
compared to the
average vehicle,
30 28 125 112 0 S50S
¦ ita ¦ ^ ¦
* Fuel georsomy !or ssli midsize cers ranges-from 20 to 123
IWRGaqun*ai«si. MPGntciuiv»T>eat! 33.7 kW-hrs .. 1 gaiion gasoline energy.
• Annual fuel coat based on 13,000 miles per year at 12 cents per kW-hr.
Visit w#bgit#-freret& calculate e
personalised for your driving, and to
downlead the fuel Economy Gyittetaise
available* st dealefsl.
mmm
-------
Vehicle A:
EPA Fuel Economy and
DOT Environmental Comparisons
Dual Fuel Vehicle:
1 Gasoline-Electricity
All Electric
Whan battery la lul ly charged, first 40 mllteaorily.
90
i:ambjn««i City/hwy
$672
M P G eq u iva lent
< g KW-hrajM*
M # I00mi4«
cast per year if
ahvayr, riin in
All Electric.
Charge & Range
j" ^har^ *me All Electric Range -ibatteryO
V B^Houb- Ofiu)«a 10 2-3 33
Gas Only
When etectnclty is used up, vahlcM runs on gas.
B54
combined culy/hw
$778
IVIPG
1,9 s:
ousl per yea r if
always run in
Gas Ottfy mode
Extended Range (gasl
How This Vehicle Compares
Among all vehicles and within midsize cars
Worst H|
^ ED
Best
1
Environment
GriH!flh5USi3 iee
£MT
TiVTiM,
^SmartVfey*
%
(COa pi'inlle, tailpipe onlyl
Other Air
PcHumnis
«w &m
Ysnur actual mileage and costs will vary with fueB cost, temperature, driving conditions, and how you
drive and m aintai r your vafiioie. Cost 04tiimaG0& are bas«d on 15.030 m iles par year at $2 80 pe r gBllon
and 12 cents per kW-hr. MPGequivalera: 33.7 fcW-hrs = t gallon gasotime anergy.
Vbit www.fueieconorny govto calculate estimates ijjpjfri / j*,\
personalized for your driving, and to download the '.yv-^jL1 J». i j j
Fu*l Economy Guide (also avail-able at de-alers). ^38^
Smartphone
Interactive
Scan Wltefer more
in form at tin a bou cthi s
vehicte or to compare
£U
O"
ffi
¦<
~u
ffi
w
Vehicle B:
EPA Fuel Economy and
DOT Environmental Comparisons
Electric Vehicle
equivalent
11QMPG
I ^7 125 112
combined city/hwv city highway
28
kW-firs per 100 miles
Annual Electric Cost
$508
Charge & Range
r ""7it ,im® on a fully cha rged battery, vehicle can tr-avel afceut..
\i hours a in "
30 40
ag 90
^90
How This Vehicle Compares
Among alt vehicles and within midsize cars
Environment
¦m
reiidsiw cars
Sretmlio
Grass
Yow actuaJ roelsaga and costs will vary with electricity cost, temperature, driving conditions, and hc»w
you dftva and maintain your vehicle. Cost estimates are based on 15,DD0 miles peryear at 12 cents per
kW-hr MPGaquivalent: 33.7 fcW-hrs = T gallon gBsotine energy.
Visit irtwivftjefeeoffo/nK-govto-calGuiate estimates jjpwt /"l
pe-rsonalizfrd for your driving, and to download the Jf% '.A J
Fuel Economy Guide
-------
Vehicle A:
EPA Fuel Economy and
DOT tnvironmental Comparisons
AH Electric "
{wtan fy ly aHaru«l|-
90
MPG equivalent
37 kW-hrs
pnr IOC rni
Charg* IsImm, Rnngw
|4hoire 40 irnlas belura
V VEt siATl'^hina tc Gjs Mfiffl
Gos Only
(wbon i?3rr it twrpty)
54
MPG
•J 0 3nl,S?S
pnr 'OOirn
Annual Fuel Cost
$712
All Electric and
Gas Only combined
Fuel Economy & Greenhouse Gas Rating
fartr.org all y«hiekw|
'a
Fuel economy foi all midsize ca-s ranges fn>rn K to 123 MPGecuisaient. This
vefckle 72 MPGcguivatert.
Environment Rating
(arron;} all vehicles)
co*
flat pipe only)
Other A r Pollutants.
~~~~
4au' of 5 (> is best)
%
UftlM
Siiki tWiy
Visit www.fueldcoiiomy.QOv
» Calwlatepgrsanaiized driwna estimates
• Download the Fud Economy 3ude
l..«ISf> available dealers)
Smart phone
Interactive
I &*»!> ixdc for ivi&rc
inromnatioT aa&Jtthis
vehide ¦or to compare ,
it with others.
VoiiF.w.iialmlipajjm. 4iir £o&t« vuJJ vary with toial r.riR.1, 'AmfVKrat iitb Hciwina innrtif^rns anrihnw
ycu drive and nankin *our valwtle. Ccat «&tferrates ate baiad on 15.0)10 nilaa pervear a! iJ-BO
per gallon end 12 wris per kVMu MPGeqtlpilaafc: 33.7 feW-frs- 1 aaliorigasolneeiiwg^
0)
a-
(D
<
¦u
re
ui
Vehicle B:
EPA Fuel Economy and
DOT Environmental Comparisons
Fuel Economy
MPGflCuiTalDn:
119
combined
125 112
city hl{Jhv\ay
Consumption
*508
annual fuel cost
OQ kW h'spor
£-0 10C mi lets
Fuel Economy & Greenhouse Gas Rating
{among all vehicles)
_LaJ_
m daze cars
Fuel economy fc all nidsUe cars ranges from 20 to 123 MPG<>Mt mdrrurniwirycur v«WcJ«. Cool «9tirT>fltes er» b«a»d sn 15,OOt rn l?»p*r
VMi at 17 f=wts. r>arkW-*ir MPAnqulWMilMnt* 33 7 lrW-lr«i = 1 J#i> n»n flasolinA Anwrov
Visit wwvw.fu0leconormi.gov
* Calcula;e tiersoiialiwd driving eslirmt.es
• Downlead ths Fuel Economy Guide
(dso available at dealers)
Environment Rating
Ianong all vehicles}
0
co2
aramsMiilif
Itaipipa only)
Otf« Air MuUflti
~~~~~
5 oil cf 5 |5 s (mil
%
E.S tM
Siivji tWdjr
Charge & Range
Full chirgn in
(i2t,,,..(^i 90
miles
iO<3>
Smartphone
Interactive
Scat ffwlf for nrne
hfcrmatfon about ihs
vehdte otto 50ir»p<*e
i: with sifter*.
-------
SQ1: -
Label Type 1 -
Vehicle A:
¦Ht
1 iii"««"=
Environmental Comparison
The above grade reflects fuel
economy and greenhouse gases.
Grading system ranges from A+ to D,
•
EM
website, here
Over five years, this v
saves *5,400
G;:-;i!imc- Vehicle
2.2
4:3
in fuel costs
compared to the
average vehicle.
13b SO IS
Comhm«| MPi>
CO:g/raie
Clli^r Aji Fo«ut»flt*
* Fuel tttrtri&my fnr ail mhfmm ears ranges f'om 2C tft 123
MPGcr».i;v.«*nt. MPGmquivai«rji: 33.7 kW-bri- 1 gallon gasoline energy.
- Annual fusl cost based on 16,000 miles per ymm at $2.80 per
Qt]/mi[« Otimr Mt PolManu
fuml economy for all tnsdsu® cars rangs* from 20 to 123
33.7 kW-lirs^ 1 gallon gasoline energy.
1 fuel cost based on 15.000 miles per year at $2 80 par gallon
and 12 cants par kVV-hf
Visit mshsifg-Memto calculate estimates
personalized for your diiving, ami to
dowtviowi the Fu»l Feoriomy GuideIslse
available st dealers).
-------
Vehicle A:
EPA Fuel Economy and
DOT Environmental Comparisons
»46".T.S
COflrtbi n&d eHy/hwy city hiflhwfry
Gasoline Vehicle
2.2
gallons used every t>QQ miles
Annual Fuel Cost
®913
How This Vehicle Compares
Among all vehicles and within midsize cars
Worst
gSTT^"
I Environment
Grwinlhouso IrJ]
Gasos Z^Um!&
Best
-------
Vehicle A:
EPA Fuel Economy and
DOT Environmental Comparisons
Fuel Economy
MPG
46
combined
43 49
city highivHy
Consumption
«913
annual fuel cost
2 2
every 100 miles
Fuel Economy & Greenhouse Gas Rating
.among all vehicles- __
1 I 7 1 I 4 I 5 I B I / 9 T '
in.s.aijH cars
Fuel economy for ail rniosias oars ranges from 20 tc 123 MPljoquivaeirii.
Your actual mSo3V£o ind ccili wll «rywi!h hiralcacl, driving liariK, »ni bowyau
driv^an'j msirton vovrveiicte Cost »5irr»at»s jrs bated on 1-5 JJOO rri-'w e>sr vwat
-15. SC per flillcn
Visit wwv/.f ueleeonomy.Ejov
¦ Ca s»ulal« persvimliflpd drisirg «s<
xs
fD
W
Vehicle B:
EPA Fuel Economy and
DOT Environmental Comparisons
All Electric
Iwinr fully thncaei l
98
T/IPG equivalent
1A feW-fcrs
per IOC m
Chaps takes !R s ng e
20 Yilkfl liefer*
swi chins to @as Mocb
Ges Only ¦ _
lAthfln hntlfirv is arnntv!'
28
MPG
3.6
per 130 n I.
Annual Fuel Cost
*1,146
All Electric and
Gas: Only cornhinec
Fuel Economy Si Greenhouse Gas Rating
•among all vehicles! ___
Fii8l woiofny for al midazecars ranges from 2U to \zs MPco3
,taipw
ycu drive and maintain vaur vehicle. Cost tsEimat&sarf b&sad on If,000 niHea per ve-ar at E2.30
pei yslScn ind 12 asrta jer kW'far. MTGjrftui v-als-nt. J3.7 kW-l'ira - 1 yaUcm gat-aline snergy.
-------
SQ2: -
Label Type 1 -
Vehicle A:
mmmnm
, 1 *i _ -
@1®
ii?:
website.here
saves s2,500
in fuel costs
compared lo the
overage vehicle.
Gasoline Vehicle
<5 niton*'
100 Mites
MPS
city
MPS
Highwaf
CGj jjAnile
tail pipe onty>
Annual
fuel cost
3 6
i
32
320
$1,500
Comb M mm®
fijjpif mum mm
BO,,
•kK-w' A'r rWiluiant*
• Fu«i «corn>rtiv fer all rnifiisii'e ears raises irem 70 la 123
MPGu.,i;v.i'«ni. MPGaqyivaiert: 33,-7 k'A'-brs - 1 gailori gasoline enefgy.
• Annual U0
In fuel costs
compared to the
average vehicle
['.krtnc Vr-hiclo
85
27 130 116 0 I$490
m
wrnhinacl MP <3*
COffl/mil#
Oth«>r Air PolKrtsnt#
» Fuel economy iof all midsize cars rangis from 20 lo 123
MPGaqywsieiH, MPGaHiiwaiani: 33.7 i;W-lir&« 1 gallon gasoline energy.
* Annus? fuel cost bssflct on 15,000 miles p®r YB3r at 12 cams per kW-hr.
Visit w&bs>te.here\o< calculate estimates
personalized for your driving, and to
download th&FusI economy Guid«lalso
availableai dealers!.
mm®
-------
Vehicle A:
EPA Fuel Economy and
DOT Environmental Comparisons
®28"7*
combined eity/hwy city highway
G as oliine Vehicle
3.6
gallons used every 100 miles
Annual Fuel Cost
$1,500
How This Vehicle Compares
Anoong all vehicles and within midsize cars
Environment
pni'Slsiie cars
es>
(C O; gftmle, tailpipe only I
Other AEr
Pollutants
¦3
Your actual milaage and r.rvsts will vary with fual cost, driving conditions, and how yew drive and
maintain yourvehicle Cos! estimatesarebased ©n 15,050 milesp«ryear ati2,30pargallon.
MPGequivalwit 33.7 l*W-ftrs = 1 gallon gasoline energy.
Visit kvww-lrueJ»cont>'m^.j|wvt» calculate estimates
personalized for your driving, and to download th-e V-* J
Fuel Economy -Guide (also available at dealers). "^BS* **(6^
I Interactive
Scot sode for
irrf'3frr»8ttonab£*jitlt)is 1
Smart phone
I vatticVa or to compare
su
O"
m
•<
T3
ffi
N»
Vehicle B:
EPA Fuel Economy and
DOT Environmental Comparisons
! 0U IV! PG equivalent
130 116
combin-ed city/hwy city highway
Electric Vehicle
Annual Electric Cost
$490
27
kW-hrs per 100 miles
Charge & Range
¦ charge ume on a ^jjy changed battery, vehicle can travel about...
\ if 1*hours g HI " "jo" "'40' ' « ""a "» 7t> 33 35'
^85
How This Vehicle Compares
Among all vehicles and within midsize cars
I Environment
Best
us aw
*¦> SmsrtWay
%
(COj grtnile, tailpipe only!
aU-i r.r
PolluEii mis
Smartphone
Interactive
Scerv code for mer©
inlormaticMialxwttnis I
vehde or io eti mpars
Ynur actual mileage .and easts will -vary with electricity cost, ternparamre, driving conditions, and how
you drive and maintain your vehicle. Cost wu mates are based on 1-5,GO!? miles pe r ye*ar at 12 cents per
kW-hr. MPQeouivalerit: 33.7 KW-ftrs= I1 gallon gBSOliFie energy.
Visit www-fu8tecotiomy.gov to calculate estimates
personalized for your driving, and to download the
Fuel Economy Guide (also available at dealers).
-------
Vehicle A:
EPA Fuel Economy and
DOT Environmental Comparisons
Kiel tconcmy Consumption
MPG
2© 25 32 ®1,500
combined ety hiihway annual fuel cost
3C gallons uwcf
iW every 100 miles
Fual Economy & Greerthousa Gas Rating
(among all vehicles)
i 2 r d ? i *n t~i n 9
Tu^ e-50nEh bsacj
coa
qrarrs/mile
¦Italppe
r*
I®
Sriartphorie
Interactive
iican code tor mere
"nfornialiori about this
tw'I tdv tii Guuui i ij.tii t
i with otho*3. | g |
fl)
O"
fD
~G
a>
u>
Vehicle B:
EPA Fuel Economy and
DOT Environmental Comparisons
$490
Fuel teonomy Consumption
MPG equivalent
Ifcw130 116
combined iiioiw^v annua fuel cost
OTP kW-hirs. pef
100 mles
Fuel Economy 8t Gra&nhou&e Gas Rating
{among ill jwh'icbej
C0
_
1 ! 1
1 ® | 9 | ~
tiidsi^ ear*
MBBi
ruel economy i®r all mielsi*® curs rengesfrom 20 to 123 MPOivuivoiini.
Your actjj!milaaqn and cast: will virv wilti nkiclricilv cosl, .Grapa-alurOrtrrio^d ttrdFual EoononvGuids
[akn avpi lahln At Heale-a)
Environment Hating
(amDiiq all vehclesl'
Iwil piiD'5 only)
GUitf Air rolluiauts
~~~~~
i, of E IS ik Isjiil I
^vSinartWyr
Charge St Range
Full mar jo n VthMfl lanlrawftlatiaul
BP 85,
' miles
Smartphone rilA^fil
Interactive
bean cod© lor more "
infor nation aljwjl iiir; m
Vfcl Ml-lt! VI UJl l l^PcBM I __
rt with other®.
-------
SQ3: -
Label Type 1 -
Vehicle A:
jlS
!.I|I
m
website.here
Over five years, this vehicte
saves $5,100
if-- t.ie! COi'li"
r-c^ipsr-vc? -.0
3--'C-'"3gC c-"ic;o,
wmrnmim
38
83
3.2
133 S330
eh mm m o
Comba«rf MPQo CO, Otfi«r Atr falluiairts
• Fu-el sconamy for nil midffiie cars rung-as from 20 Jo 123
MPGl;1?i,v.rifli. ^PGaqm-/qiftN;33,7 kW-hrs 1 gaikm gasoiiri-e snefgy.
• Annua! fuel cost basatJ on 15,000 miles per year at S3.80 per gallon
and 12 cents pwr kW br,
Visit wahsite. he r# to calculate estimates
p-ifsonalOTd for your driving, and to
-------
Vehicle A:
EPA Fuel Economy and
DOT Environmental Comparisons
I>ual Fuel Vehicle:
1 Gasoline-Electricity
All Electric
When battery is fully fi fit 32 mite* on ly.
89
cambinfld city.'h/ry
®679
MPGequ iva lent
fcW-hfS|M0f
JO td6n.it™
cost par year if
fsUvay s run in
All Electric
Gas Only
When etectncliy is used up, vehicle runs on gas.
MPG
3 J gallMHs p«
¦ Cm W& inikjB
»31
::ami:iri(id cily.
$ 1,355
lost per year if
ifways run in
Gere Only nvod»
Charge St Range
''**)» Hilarys unie AM E|eartt nange (battery) Eslended Range Cgasl
\ hours omii® no 33 32 « 3S i
How This Vehicle Compares
Among all vehicles and within midsize cars
M
midsize cars
I
Environment
Your actual mileage and crusts will vary with fuel cost, temperature, driving condition 5. und hew you
drive and maintain your vehicle. Cost estimates a re based on 15.000 miles per vea rat 12.60 per gallon
and 12 cents per kW-h-r. MPGaquivalent: 33.? kW-i»rs= 1 gallon gaso-tinaenergy.
Visit wtYw.fuel8«Qt}om y.gov to calculate sstimatss 'jPjfe1' ri(pS;r
personalized for your driving, and to downloa d Use J
Fuel Economy Gutda (also available at dealers). kitr
tCOa fl/mila, tailpipe only I
Other A ir
StYiartphone
Interactive
Scan ends for more
informatrari about this
vatofife or to com pare 1—1I-J ~d ¦ I
jwihdhiTv iijfysfl
OJ
€7
ro
<
TS
ft)
Nl
Vehicle B:
EPA Fuel Economy and
DOT Environmental Comparisons
' 0M ffU IV1PG equivalent
\£ I 125 116
combined cry/'hwy city highrway
El&tnic Vehicle
Annual Electric Cost
s501
28
kW-hrs p^r 100 miles
Charge Si Range
I"^jjl Cliarae nine .on a fu||v charged battery, vehicle can travel about.. pan Q (|
\ IS 1* hours n in 20 3D « m er. to bo'CPo wV r
How This Vehicle Compares
Among all vehicles and within midsize cars
I Environment
GJ
Gaaa
iCOa a 'm ile, tailpi pe onlyl
Othar Air
Pollute nta
> SmartWay
1=90
Interactive
Scan ends for more
information about "this
vafskie or 1.0 com pare
il vaitii rflnsrs.
Simartphone
VYto calculate estimates
personalized for your driving, and to download the
Fuesl Economy Guide (also available at dealers).
1©
-------
Vehicle A:
EPA Fuel Economy and
DOT E nvironrrental Comparisons
Atl Clectrit '
iMw "ullv
89
Cha-gBtnfaM :%&*&*
(UPG nrj livalnnl
30M.hr,
per 100 rni
f4^7iS 32 rru lee be to-a
;wl^..na to Ga* IVodo
Gos Only
r-Lvhon fcattory ic jmptyl
31
W1PG
32 gallons
per 150 mi
Annual Fuel Cost
$990
All Electric and
Gas Only contlnad
Fuel Economy & Greenhouse Gas Rating
feruonij all vetiiule»t
¦Hkli
51 b r 71 >Tn^}
rfiide.3# cars
wmm
Fuo oconorny fc>r jll midsize care ranges from 20to 123 MPCocjjivaloniL Thii?
flels M Pf»ar|i i va wit
Environment Rating
(irtursn all vehicles)
CD-,
'{jrarrisy'milft
Jtcilpiwonly)
133:
\
nthet tic PrilSliT
~ ~~~
4au! of 5(1 is best)
Visit www.fuolaconomy.50v
» falrjilMflpfWKnruWimi ririvinfl
• Download the Fuel Econonv 3ude
(also sr/ailaUe al defers)
Smanphone
Interactive
S^neoae Tor more
inluiuiidiiu 1 dJujl iJiii
vehicle or to compare
it vw«h odwi,
Vvbr actual jnllwys* «otU cwit w4ll ?wy rt ii 1 frwl JO&lj lS»HLWUturtt Or vmg turHiiuuii*, ahJIujw
you drviiii'id rrairtain yiu» v«ft*c(e. Co«t 4utiniaK&r gallon ard 12 cams per tW hr. MPG«quivaJam 33.7fcVMva - t gallon oaiollne entfov.
Q)
O-
fD
<
"G
w
Vehicle B:
EPA Fuel Economy and
DOT Environmental Comparisons
Fuel Economy
IVIPG equ rvalcitt
121
combined
125 116
city highway
Consumption
$501
annual fuel cost
28 ¦cW-hrs per
100 mrea
Fuel Economy & Greenhouse Gas Rating
(amoix al vehicles)
TiTrnTT
fttidsije cars
%
Q
Fuel ^onoTtv for all mlriebeesrs frr3m?0to 133 MFGwiv**-
vour actual nilsaga and :osls will wary wi! 1 ebclrtcily :osl, lsm30tall.ro, drwimj condition:.
and now >nu drwea-r.d nrwitanyourveirice. fort 9*tinai=is are tiajwjor isxockj miles p?r
V*«r aLTZuenls pwi kVMc. NPa««jilvafwu.3J J k'AMir-1»* 1 yJl'-rn yatsdHiw hhwpjy
Visit www.fu«l»conomfgov
* Caleuk-te vertG'kafi&J driving estimate*
• Downloac the fue Ecorornv 'jUidte
(also available -=t dealers)
ff
Environment Rating
lonong all yatolclee}
0CO;
fl-Ar\s.fmile
llailpipflorly)
Olh«r Air P.vJIiHjwTs
~~~~~
5 owl af 5 |5 is Ixistl
^SBftVfty-
Charge & Range
Ynhldri can tra/Bl atiuui
12
80
miles
u
Smortphone
Interactive
Scan code for more
information about ihie
vehicle cr to compare _
it witfi Gthe_s. ||Jf^
-------
SQ4: -
Label Type 1 -
Vehicle A:
£
EPA | Fli«;I Economy nnd
DOT I Environmental Comparison
i
The abov
. i fuel
: >e gases,
rtom A+ to
mw
wm*
saves H5,l6b
Dllill Flit. l Vuf;:v:lt:.
in *..K* i co
c: ^ipjr-r:J to the
avenge vehicle.
37 30 3.1 32
B ^ ?~* 13
* Fuel 'iconomy tor ail rn>d&i.z<3 curs ranges from 20 to 123
MPGfifif.ii-v.iNnt', MPG*qiJivai*r,i: 33,7 kW-hrs - 1 gallon gasoiins energy,
• Annual fuel cost based on 15rfr00 miles per year at 52'. 60 per gallon
jnci !2c.• ;sirt- .'-^c Ic. u.;hius ;;>nate$
tor vour •vinw's-j aid to
nl- rl!< ITi|»lso
-------
Vehicle A:
EPA Fuel Economy and
DOT Environmental Comparisons
~ Dual Fuel Vehicle:
All Electric
When batsery is l uity eba r^jed.. firtt 39 mll-sa only.
M P G eq u i va lent
90
CDTOijificd cjty.'hwy
$672
B—
37 (Kse*
cos! per year if
always ntn in
All Electric.
Gas Only
When eteetncltv is used up.vehlefe tuns on gas.
MPG
B32 a.,
cambiiicid ctlyi'hwy
$1,313
. 1 cais
cost per year if
always run in
Gas Only mode
Charge & Range
Ll™ guar at umt All Electric Range (bstte^j Extended Range (
{ |P*»h«H>rs 0(mra, 10 20 3*Q aa 3D
ec ?o
How This Vehicle Compares
Among all vehicles and within midsize cacs
Worst
is ^
midsize cars
fm
JESaJ
Best
I
Environment
f£JW»
eabl V
Griwjnh dusc A
jCOj fli'mile, tailpipe only)
Y00 miles
Charge & Range
'' "j, g'laraa ame Blended Electric:. Gas Range (battery!
VV
cast per y«ar il
always run »n
Gas Only mode
Extended Re nge (g-as \
50 SO 70 HO 90 km O O
HDwThis Vehidfe Compares
Among all vehicles and within midstefieais
Worst I
Best
midsize cars
I
Environment
Greenhouse J&TM
Gases «safl ™ BwP
-------
Vehicle A:
EPA Fuel Economv and
DOT Environmental Comparisons
All Electric
¦iVTifln fully surged}
Gas Orly
90
IVIPG equivalent
fJT1 -:W h"G
O f 3G» no ni
CfBrge tatoe& Abos#
H 30 miles before
14
swiitfimg to ftasMode
(wliei tjaneiyte empiyl
32
MPG
3*1 saHon*
m I prr 1'?Q n
Annual Fuel Cost
*973
AH Electric and
Gas Drily combined
Fuel Economy & Greenhouse Gas Rating
larnong all veiicles|^ ___
—ii i i ii s i h i / i m r*n
TO
B
I ITidfiilg CM& 1
Fuel economy fcr all midsize cars ranges tot> 20 to 1:2c MKjsqiiiveiea. This
vehl
U)
Vehicle B:
EPA Fuel Economy and
DOT Environmental Comparisons
Blended Etectrtc+Gss
iwher luity iharaedl
65
£iwru» takers Rangp
4 • • '(*
fc Gas Only
Iwrwn- broery Is e-npry:
IV1PQ e^uive lent
y iill d i yas
1r
¦3 per 130 miles
Mi V
il'ilrig r.» rVtft M^ rlii
54
MPG
-j g g3il oweilBble «t d*«l«r»)
Smartphon«
Interactive
Scam code for more !*T.
mformaion aaout tiis
vetiicie or T& compare
it with Q
Youf Actualnudesaeand c^^rs> wtfl viarir ¦AiWvi'uel c^stterncemuifc. iriwin-j c«nciti«fi& and how
yoj dnva-and manttin ^oir vehicle C>atestimates it* baiedon 15,000 miles pw yea- ac£23i0
pa? galtcn and12eefit3 pei kW-hf. MFQ««|Ufva^nt:3aJ W hrj ¦ I gallon gfiadllOA energy.
m
-------
Appendix 2 -
Regression Results -
-------
Fuel Economy Label Models
Technical Memo
Dammen, Pozdena
ECONorthwest
Fuel Economy Label Survey Choice Models
Technical Memorandum
Label Understanding and Vehicle Selection Models
Interpretation of the coefficients and odds ratios from the logistic regressions 2
Label Understanding Model Results 5
Vehicle Preference (Selection) Model Results 14
Page J
-------
Fuel Economy Label Models
Technical Memo
Dammen, Pozdena
ECONorthwest
Interpretation of the Coefficients and Odds Ratios from Logistic
Regressions
This technical memorandum presents the preliminary results of the modeling for the
EPA/NHTSA Fuel Economy Label Design survey. From the Fuel Economy Label survey
data, the presented results are from the discrete choice modeling of the following:
1. Respondent label understanding responses (Understanding Questions 1-6)
2. Respondent vehicle preference/likely to purchase (Selection Questions 1-4)
Logit (choice) models are estimated with the binary (e.g., 0 or 1) choice variable (the
answer to either the understanding or vehicle choice questions) on the left-hand side of
the model. The label design indicator variables and a series of demographic and other
respondent survey responses are on the right-hand side (RHS), as either the control or
predictor variables.
The logit model is the appropriate model when the variable of interest is a binary
variable (e.g., the variable takes on values of 0 or 1). The logit model predicts the
probability of the dependent variable taking on a value equal to 1, given the predictor
and control variables of the model.
The probability of the outcome, and the odds ratio of the outcome are key concepts
for correctly interpreting the results from these models.
For the label understanding choice models:
¦ Probability is defined as the probability that the respondent selects the correct
answer. E.g., p is the probability that the respondent answers correctly, or
p(correct=l)
¦ The 'odds' of a correct answer is the ratio of the probability of a correct answer
(p), over the probability of the incorrect answer (1-p), or: p/(l-p).
¦ And the log odds ratio, or "logit" is then: LN(p/(l-p))
¦ The "Both are equally good" responses to Understanding Questions 1-6 were
categorized as "incorrect" for the label understanding modeling.
For the vehicle likely to purchase (selection) choice models:
¦ Probability is defined as the probability that the respondent selects the first
vehicle (i.e., Vehicle A). To interpret the results from the vehicle preference
models, it is important to consider the model results with respect to the two
vehicles being compared and the vehicle that corresponds to Vehicle A (e.g.,
p(vehicle A=1)).
¦ The "Equally likely to purchase either vehicle" responses were randomly assigned
to Vehicle A or Vehicle B, using a uniform distribution.
Simple Numerical Example of an Odds Ratio
Prior to Understanding Questions 1 and 2 in the survey, respondents are shown fuel
economy labels for a gasoline vehicle and a dual fuel electric vehicle. Understanding
Page 2
-------
Fuel Economy Label Models
Technical Memo
Dammen, Pozdena
ECONorthwest
Question 1 then asks respondents which vehicle is better for a 30-mile round-trip (the
correct answer is the dual fuel electric).
The frequency tabulation for the answers to Understanding Question 1 is shown in Table
1.
Table 1 'Correct' and 'Incorrect' Frequency Tabulation for Understanding Question 1
Understanding
Question 1
Frequency
Correct
2,097
Incorrect
608
Total
2,705
From this frequency tabulation of the answers to Understanding Question 1, we can
calculate the following:
¦ The probability of the respondent selecting the correct answer is:
p = prob(correct=l )= 2097/2705 = 0.775
¦ The odds of a correct answer are: 0.775/(1-0.775) = 3.449
¦ The log odds is: log(3.45) = 1.238
The calculated log odds is the same as the estimated coefficient on the constant term
in a model without any other predictor variables:
Table 2 Logistic Regression Results for Understanding Question 1, Constant Term Only
Logistic regression Number of obs = 2705
Question 1 |
+
Coef.
Std. Err.
N
A
Q_
N
[95% Conf. Interval]
Constant |
1.238088
.0460609
26.88 0.000
1.14781 1.328366
This simple numerical example of the calculation of the odds ratio and the presentation
of the logistic regression results for a model with only a constant term are intended to
illustrate the basic interpretation of the odds ratio.1 As predictor variables are
introduced to the model, the interpretation of the coefficients and odds ratio does not
change in any fundamental way.
1 This exposition is based on the explanation provided at: UCLA, Academic Technology Services, Statistical Consulting
Group. FAQ: How do I interpret odds ratios in logistic regression?
http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/mult pka/faa/aeneral/odds ratio.htm (accessed October 9, 2010).
Page 3
-------
Fuel Economy Label Models
Technical Memo
Dammen, Pozdena
ECONorthwest
Notably, we can make the following statements about the correct interpretation of the
logistic regression results:
¦ The estimated coefficients from the models represent the rate of change in the
log odds ratio for the change in the predictor (RHS) variable.
¦ These changes are interpreted relative to the default case for dichotomous RHS
variables; and are interpreted for a one-unit change in the RHS variable in the
case of continuous RHS variables.
¦ From the above example, we can see that the odds ratio is an easy
mathematical transformation and more intuitive way to interpret the model
results.
¦ For a given right-hand side variable, the odds ratio is the estimated effect on the
odds ratio for the event for that predictor variable. Based on this explanation, we
can make the following interpretations and conclusions about the coefficients
and odds ratios:
¦ An odds ratio of 1.5 is interpreted as the predictor variable being associated
with the odds of a correct answer being 1 and 1/2 times more likely than the
odds of the incorrect answer.
¦ Negative coefficients from the model produce odds ratios of less than one,
so a change in the right-hand side variable makes the outcome less likely to
Again, the coefficients from the logistic regression for dichotomous right-hand side
variables are always interpreted relative to the default case. For example, if the
coefficient on Male (gender) is 0.391 then using the odds ratio transformation of the
coefficient, the odds ratio is 1.478. This indicates that the odds for a correct answer are
147.8 percent for males than the odds for females.
For a continuous right-hand side variable, the coefficient represented as the odds ratio
is the effect of a 1 -unit change in the variable on the difference in log odds. For
example: for a one-unit increase in the share of miles in the city, we see a 100.7 percent
increase in the odds of selecting the correct answer in the understanding choice
models (or, of selecting vehicle A, in the case of the selection models). (Note than
interpretation of negative odds ratios are conceptually slightly more complex.)
Thus, each exponentiated coefficient is either the ratio of two odds (e.g., for
dichotomous RHS variables); or the change in odds (continuous) for a unit increase in
the corresponding RHS variable holding other variables at constant value(s).
The following pages present the model estimation results for the choice models. The
results contain both the estimated coefficient and the odds ratio. The z-statistic is
displayed in parentheses underneath the estimated coefficient. The z-statistic indicates
whether the estimated coefficient is statistically different from zero.
occur.
Page 4
-------
EPA Fuel Economy Label Choice ... „ _ _ „ „ _
Models Understanding Questions 1 & 2
Gasoline Vehicle Label Compared With Electric Vehicle Label
(Correct Answer=l, Incorrect Answer=0)
Correctly identified vehicle B, an Correctly identified vehicle A, a
electric vehicle as the better vehicle for gasoline vehicle, as better for 120-mile
a 30-mile round-trip, compared to round-trip, compared to vehicle B, an
vehicle A, a gasoline vehicle. electric vehicle.
Independent Variables
Coefficient
(z-statistic)
Odds Ratio
Coefficient
(z-statistic)
Odds Ratio
Constant
-0.048
0.953
0.247
1.280
(0.060)
(0.340)
Label 1 Dummy Variable
-0.709
0.492
0.183
1.201
(5.65)**
(1.770)
Label 2 Dummy Variable
-0.311
0.733
0.316
1.372
(2.30)*
(2.91)**
City Miles Share of Miles (e.g., 1-100)
-0.002
0.998
-0.004
0.996
(0.630)
(1.830)
Age 18-24
-0.258
0.773
-0.610
0.543
(0.690)
(1.880)
Age 25-34
-0.189
0.828
-0.238
0.788
(0.730)
(1.150)
Age 35-44
-0.237
0.789
-0.090
0.914
(0.910)
(0.440)
Age 45-54
-0.369
0.691
0.218
1.244
(1.500)
(1.110)
Age 55-64
0.103
1.108
0.049
1.050
(0.420)
(0.260)
Less than High School
-0.822
0.440
-1.016
0.362
(1.030)
(1.320)
High School
-0.490
0.613
-0.653
0.520
(2.30)*
(3.51)**
Some College
-0.339
0.712
-0.219
0.803
(2.23)*
(1.780)
College
-0.236
0.790
0.029
1.029
(1.690)
(0.260)
Household Income Less Than $15k
0.150
1.162
-0.316
0.729
(0.300)
(0.680)
Household Income $15-$25k
-0.714
0.490
-0.634
0.530
(1.610)
(1.370)
Household Income $25-$50k
0.010
1.010
0.042
1.043
(0.040)
(0.210)
Household Income $50-$75k
0.345
1.412
0.142
1.153
(1.770)
(0.890)
Household Income $75-$100k
0.179
1.196
0.255
1.290
(1.090)
(1.840)
Household Income $100-$125k
0.356
1.428
0.066
1.068
(2.12)*
(0.480)
Household Income $125-$150k
0.393
1.481
0.195
1.215
(2.04)*
(1.250)
Household Size=l
0.677
1.968
-0.458
0.633
(1.000)
(0.780)
Household Size=2
-0.045
0.956
-0.357
0.700
(0.090)
(0.770)
Household Size=3
0.341
1.406
-0.155
0.856
(0.720)
(0.340)
Household Size=4
0.279
1.322
-0.342
0.710
(0.590)
(0.750)
Household Size=5
0.356
1.428
-0.306
0.736
(0.740)
(0.660)
Household Size=6
0.967
2.630
-0.410
0.664
(1.650)
(0.790)
-------
EPA Fuel Economy Label Choice ... „ _ _ „ „ _
Models Understanding Questions 1 & 2
Gasoline Vehicle Label Compared With Electric Vehicle Label
(Correct Answer=l, Incorrect Answer=0)
Correctly identified vehicle B, an Correctly identified vehicle A, a
electric vehicle as the better vehicle for gasoline vehicle, as better for 120-mile
a 30-mile round-trip, compared to round-trip, compared to vehicle B, an
vehicle A, a gasoline vehicle. electric vehicle.
Independent Variables
Coefficient
(z-statistic)
Odds Ratio
Coefficient
(z-statistic)
Odds Ratio
Household Vehicles=l
-0.614
0.541
-0.279
0.757
(1.270)
(0.700)
Household Vehicles=2
-0.144
0.866
-0.507
0.602
(0.540)
(2.23)*
Household Vehicles=3
-0.126
0.882
-0.457
0.633
(0.480)
(2.05)*
Household Vehicles=4
-0.233
0.792
-0.397
0.672
(0.840)
(1.630)
Licensed Drivers in Household=l
1.512
4.536
1.423
4.150
(2.32)*
(2.64)**
Licensed Drivers in Household=2
1.033
2.809
1.160
3.190
(2.57)*
(3.10)**
Licensed Drivers in Household=3
0.957
2.604
1.239
3.452
(2.43)*
(3.36)**
Licensed Drivers in Household=4
0.828
2.289
1.209
3.350
(2.07)*
(3.21)**
Male
0.446
1.562
0.393
1.481
(3.89)**
(4.24)**
Daily Miles Driven, Less than 20
0.187
1.206
-0.264
0.768
(0.520)
(0.860)
Daily Miles Driven, 20-30
0.123
1.131
-0.293
0.746
(0.340)
(0.950)
Daily Miles Driven, 31-40
0.099
1.104
-0.490
0.613
(0.270)
(1.570)
Daily Miles Driven, 41-50
0.216
1.241
-0.092
0.912
(0.570)
(0.280)
Daily Miles Driven, 51-60
0.378
1.459
-0.278
0.757
(0.960)
(0.850)
Daily Miles Driven, 61-70
-0.244
0.783
-0.637
0.529
(0.590)
(1.760)
Daily Miles Driven, 71-80
0.297
1.346
-0.630
0.533
(0.640)
(1.660)
Daily Miles Driven, 81-90
-1.001
0.368
-0.420
0.657
(2.10)*
(0.960)
Daily Miles Driven, 91-100
0.294
1.342
-0.173
0.841
(0.590)
(0.430)
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 2
(7 =very important)
0.425
1.530
-0.268
0.765
(0.830)
(0.580)
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 3
(7 =very important)
0.066
1.068
-0.730
0.482
(0.140)
(1.680)
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 4
(7 =very important)
0.445
1.560
-0.574
0.563
(0.980)
(1.400)
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 5
(7 =very important)
0.488
1.629
-0.426
0.653
(1.070)
(1.040)
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 6
(7 =very important)
0.509
1.664
-0.644
0.525
(1.100)
(1.540)
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 7
(7 =very important)
0.233
1.262
-0.848
0.428
(0.490)
(1.98)*
-------
EPA Fuel Economy Label Choice ... „ _ _ „ „ _
Models Understanding Questions 1 & 2
Gasoline Vehicle Label Compared With Electric Vehicle Label
(Correct Answer=l, Incorrect Answer=0)
Correctly identified vehicle B, an Correctly identified vehicle A, a
electric vehicle as the better vehicle for gasoline vehicle, as better for 120-mile
a 30-mile round-trip, compared to round-trip, compared to vehicle B, an
vehicle A, a gasoline vehicle. electric vehicle.
Independent Variables
Coefficient
(z-statistic)
Odds Ratio
Coefficient
(z-statistic)
Odds Ratio
Importance of Fuel Economy Label = 2
0.144
1.155
0.213
1.237
(0.410)
(0.730)
Importance of Fuel Economy Label = 3
-0.072
0.931
0.142
1.153
(0.220)
(0.520)
Importance of Fuel Economy Label=4
-0.232
0.793
-0.055
0.946
(0.760)
(0.210)
Importance of Fuel Economy Label=5
-0.020
0.980
0.045
1.046
(0.060)
(0.170)
Importance of Fuel Economy Label=6
0.209
1.232
0.124
1.132
(0.650)
(0.460)
Importance of Fuel Economy Label=7
0.277
1.319
-0.047
0.954
(0.810)
(0.170)
Vehicles considered=Sports Car
-0.066
0.936
-0.321
0.725
(0.400)
(2.29)*
Vehicles considered=Subcompact Car
-0.052
0.949
0.423
1.527
(0.220)
(2.24)*
Vehicles considered=Compact Car
0.330
1.391
0.271
1.311
(2.13)*
(2.20)*
Vehicles considered=Midsized Car
0.161
1.175
0.093
1.097
(1.400)
(1.000)
Vehicles considered=Large Car
-0.010
0.990
0.162
1.176
(0.060)
(1.080)
Vehicles considered=Station Wagon
-0.385
0.680
-0.274
0.760
(1.600)
(1.310)
Vehicles considered=SUV
0.108
1.114
-0.078
0.925
(0.930)
(0.810)
Vehicles considered=Crossover
0.038
1.039
0.417
1.517
(0.300)
(3.99)**
Vehicles considered=Pickup Truck
0.004
1.004
-0.063
0.939
(0.020)
(0.440)
Vehicles considered=Mini-Van
0.157
1.170
0.187
1.206
(0.800)
(1.170)
Vehicles considered=Van
-1.067
0.344
-0.820
0.440
(2.39)*
(1.890)
Vehicles considered=Other
0.707
2.028
0.841
2.319
(1.750)
(2.86)**
Early Adopter=2 (1 is first to adopt)
0.077
1.080
-0.274
0.760
(0.310)
(1.310)
Early Adopter=3 (1 is first to adopt)
0.260
1.297
0.073
1.076
(1.080)
(0.370)
Early Adopter=4 (1 is first to adopt)
-0.062
0.940
0.120
1.127
(0.270)
(0.610)
Early Adopter=5 (1 is first to adopt)
-0.035
0.966
-0.012
0.988
(0.150)
(0.060)
Early Adopter=6 (1 is first to adopt)
0.007
1.007
0.020
1.020
(0.030)
(0.090)
Early Adopter=7 (1 is first to adopt)
-0.585
0.557
-0.306
0.736
(1.820)
(1.040)
Observations 2358 2382
Absolute value o statistics i parentheses
significant at 5% * significant at 1%
significant at 10% * significant at 5% significant at 1%
-------
EPA Fuel Economy Label Choice
Models
Understanding Questions 3 & 4
Comparison of the Labels for two Dual Fuel Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles
(Correct Answer=l, Incorrect Answer=0)
Correctly identified vehicle A, a Dual
Fuel PHEV as the better vehicle for a 20
mile round-trip compared to vehicle B,
also a Dual Fuel PHEV.
Correctly identified vehicle B, a Dual
Fuel PHEV as the better vehicle for a
120-mile round-trip compared to
vehicle B, also a Dual Fuel PHEV.
Independent Variables
Coefficient
(z-statistic)
Odds Ratio
Coefficient
(z-statistic)
Odds Ratio
Constant
-0.840
0.432
-1.132
0.322
(1.210)
(1.620)
Label 1 Dummy Variable
-0.326
0.722
-0.050
0.951
(3.21)**
(0.500)
Label 2 Dummy Variable
0.256
1.292
0.273
1.314
(2.42)*
(2.53)*
City Miles Share of Miles (e.g., 1-100)
0.001
1.001
-0.001
0.999
(0.350)
(0.610)
Age 18-24
0.032
1.033
0.421
1.523
(0.100)
(1.340)
Age 25-34
0.205
1.228
0.325
1.384
(1.000)
(1.570)
Age 35-44
0.004
1.004
0.114
1.121
(0.020)
(0.550)
Age 45-54
0.004
1.004
0.139
1.149
(0.020)
(0.710)
Age 55-64
0.077
1.080
0.369
1.446
(0.410)
(1.950)
Less than High School
-0.110
0.896
-0.526
0.591
(0.140)
(0.690)
High School
-0.190
0.827
0.143
1.154
(1.050)
(0.790)
Some College
-0.112
0.894
0.097
1.102
(0.920)
(0.790)
College
-0.060
0.942
0.031
1.031
(0.550)
(0.280)
Household Income Less Than $15k
0.191
1.210
-0.404
0.668
(0.450)
(0.900)
Household Income $15-$25k
-1.310
0.270
-0.088
0.916
(2.68)**
(0.210)
Household Income $25-$50k
-0.163
0.850
-0.023
0.977
(0.810)
(0.110)
Household Income $50-$75k
0.044
1.045
-0.021
0.979
(0.280)
(0.130)
Household Income $75-$100k
-0.074
0.929
0.032
1.033
(0.550)
(0.230)
Household Income $100-$125k
0.099
1.104
0.192
1.212
(0.720)
(1.390)
Household Income $125-$150k
0.164
1.178
0.042
1.043
(1.080)
(0.270)
Household Size=l
0.469
1.598
-0.421
0.656
(0.820)
(0.730)
Household Size=2
0.187
1.206
-0.057
0.945
(0.410)
(0.130)
Household Size=3
0.330
1.391
-0.045
0.956
(0.730)
(0.100)
Household Size=4
0.308
1.361
0.071
1.074
(0.680)
(0.160)
Household Size=5
0.354
1.425
0.142
1.153
(0.780)
(0.320)
Household Size=6
0.449
1.567
-0.107
0.899
(0.880)
(0.210)
-------
EPA Fuel Economy Label Choice
Models
Understanding Questions 3 & 4
Comparison of the Labels for two Dual Fuel Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles
(Correct Answer=l, Incorrect Answer=0)
Correctly identified vehicle A, a Dual Correctly identified vehicle B, a Dual
Fuel PHEV as the better vehicle for a 20; Fuel PHEV as the better vehicle for a
mile round-trip compared to vehicle B, 120-mile round-trip compared to
also a Dual Fuel PHEV. vehicle B, also a Dual Fuel PHEV.
Independent Variables
Coefficient
(z-statistic)
Odds Ratio
Coefficient
(z-statistic)
Odds Ratio
Household Vehicles=l
-0.328
0.720
-0.082
0.921
(0.840)
(0.210)
Household Vehicles=2
-0.213
0.808
-0.243
0.784
(0.970)
(1.090)
Household Vehicles=3
-0.264
0.768
-0.237
0.789
(1.230)
(1.090)
Household Vehicles=4
-0.351
0.704
-0.118
0.889
(1.500)
(0.500)
Licensed Drivers in Household=l
0.131
1.140
0.535
1.707
(0.250)
(1.010)
Licensed Drivers in Household=2
-0.203
0.816
0.279
1.322
(0.570)
(0.770)
Licensed Drivers in Household=3
-0.360
0.698
0.216
1.241
(1.030)
(0.610)
Licensed Drivers in Household=4
-0.269
0.764
-0.172
0.842
(0.750)
(0.470)
Male
0.281
1.324
0.513
1.670
(3.11)**
(5.58)**
Daily Miles Driven, Less than 20
0.169
1.184
0.036
1.037
(0.570)
(0.120)
Daily Miles Driven, 20-30
0.221
1.247
-0.064
0.938
(0.740)
(0.210)
Daily Miles Driven, 31-40
0.150
1.162
-0.100
0.905
(0.500)
(0.330)
Daily Miles Driven, 41-50
0.073
1.076
-0.250
0.779
(0.230)
(0.800)
Daily Miles Driven, 51-60
0.188
1.207
-0.206
0.814
(0.600)
(0.650)
Daily Miles Driven, 61-70
0.295
1.343
-0.085
0.919
(0.840)
(0.240)
Daily Miles Driven, 71-80
0.046
1.047
-0.314
0.731
(0.120)
(0.850)
Daily Miles Driven, 81-90
0.202
1.224
0.248
1.281
(0.480)
(0.570)
Daily Miles Driven, 91-100
-0.030
0.970
-0.357
0.700
(0.080)
(0.900)
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 2
(7 =very important)
0.453
1.573
0.668
1.950
(1.000)
(1.460)
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 3
(7 =very important)
0.352
1.422
0.453
1.573
(0.820)
(1.050)
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 4
(7 =very important)
0.383
1.467
0.495
1.640
(0.950)
(1.220)
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 5
(7 =very important)
0.315
1.370
0.686
1.986
(0.780)
(1.680)
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 6
(7 =very important)
0.481
1.618
0.582
1.790
(1.170)
(1.400)
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 7
(7 =very important)
0.306
1.358
0.573
1.774
(0.720)
(1.350)
-------
EPA Fuel Economy Label Choice
Models
Understanding Questions 3 & 4
Comparison of the Labels for two Dual Fuel Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles
(Correct Answer=l, Incorrect Answer=0)
Correctly identified vehicle A, a Dual
Fuel PHEV as the better vehicle for a 20
mile round-trip compared to vehicle B,
also a Dual Fuel PHEV.
Correctly identified vehicle B, a Dual
Fuel PHEV as the better vehicle for a
120-mile round-trip compared to
vehicle B, also a Dual Fuel PHEV.
Independent Variables
Coefficient
(z-statistic)
Odds Ratio
Coefficient
(z-statistic)
Odds Ratio
Importance of Fuel Economy Label = 2
0.311
1.365
-0.143
0.867
(1.090)
(0.490)
Importance of Fuel Economy Label = 3
-0.071
0.931
-0.163
0.850
(0.270)
(0.600)
Importance of Fuel Economy Label=4
-0.149
0.862
-0.253
0.776
(0.590)
(0.980)
Importance of Fuel Economy Label = 5
-0.107
0.899
-0.266
0.766
(0.420)
(1.030)
Importance of Fuel Economy Label=6
-0.046
0.955
-0.152
0.859
(0.170)
(0.570)
Importance of Fuel Economy Label=7
0.013
1.013
-0.284
0.753
(0.050)
(1.000)
Vehicles considered=Sports Car
-0.186
0.830
-0.153
0.858
(1.340)
(1.110)
Vehicles considered=Subcompact Car
0.022
1.022
-0.067
0.935
(0.120)
(0.360)
Vehicles considered=Compact Car
0.206
1.229
0.213
1.237
(1.720)
(1.750)
Vehicles considered=Midsized Car
0.048
1.049
-0.002
0.998
(0.520)
(0.020)
Vehicles considered=Large Car
0.133
1.142
0.115
1.122
(0.910)
(0.770)
Vehicles considered=Station Wagon
0.265
1.303
0.674
1.962
(1.290)
(2.96)**
Vehicles considered=SUV
0.049
1.050
0.112
1.119
(0.520)
(1.170)
Vehicles considered=Crossover
0.043
1.044
0.031
1.031
(0.420)
(0.300)
Vehicles considered=Pickup Truck
0.042
1.043
-0.035
0.966
(0.300)
(0.240)
Vehicles considered=Mini-Van
0.068
1.070
0.057
1.059
(0.440)
(0.350)
Vehicles considered=Van
-0.120
0.887
0.795
2.214
(0.290)
(1.730)
Vehicles considered=Other
-0.277
0.758
-0.136
0.873
(0.980)
(0.490)
Early Adopter=2 (1 is first to adopt)
0.125
1.133
0.349
1.418
(0.610)
(1.700)
Early Adopter=3 (1 is first to adopt)
0.302
1.353
0.638
1.893
(1.540)
(3.22)**
Early Adopter=4 (1 is first to adopt)
0.124
1.132
0.424
1.528
(0.640)
(2.19)*
Early Adopter=5 (1 is first to adopt)
0.178
1.195
0.462
1.587
(0.890)
(2.32)*
Early Adopter=6 (1 is first to adopt)
0.054
1.055
0.376
1.456
(0.240)
(1.680)
Early Adopter=7 (1 is first to adopt)
-0.181
0.834
0.002
1.002
(0.620)
(0.010)
Observations
2389
2376
Absolute value o statistics i parentheses
significant at 5% * significant at 1%
significant at 10% * significant at 5% si
-------
EPA Fuel Economy Label Choice
Models
Understanding Questions 5 & 6
Dual Fuel PHEV Vehicle Label Compared With an Electric Vehicle Label
(Correct Answer=l, Incorrect Answer=0)
Correctly identified vehicle B, an
Electric Vehicle as better for 30-mile
round-trip compared to vehicle A, a
Dual Fuel Extended Range Electric
Vehicle.
Correctly identified vehicle A, a Dual
Fuel Extended Range Electric Vehicle
as better for 120-mile round-trip
compared to vehicle B, an Electric
Vehicle.
Independent Variables
Coefficient
(z-statistic)
Odds Ratio
Coefficient
(z-statistic)
Odds Ratio
Constant
0.087
1.091
-0.555
0.574
(0.120)
(0.800)
Label 1 Dummy Variable
-0.120
0.887
0.091
1.095
(1.180)
(0.880)
Label 2 Dummy Variable
0.282
1.326
0.471
1.602
(2.56)*
(4.35)**
City Miles Share of Miles (e.g., 1-100)
0.001
1.001
-0.003
0.997
(0.650)
(1.320)
Age 18-24
-0.289
0.749
-0.391
0.676
(0.900)
(1.220)
Age 25-34
-0.206
0.814
-0.377
0.686
(0.960)
(1.810)
Age 35-44
-0.171
0.843
-0.291
0.748
(0.800)
(1.400)
Age 45-54
-0.361
0.697
-0.130
0.878
(1.780)
(0.660)
Age 55-64
-0.152
0.859
-0.140
0.869
(0.770)
(0.740)
Less than High School
-0.757
0.469
-0.746
0.474
(0.970)
(0.970)
High School
0.055
1.057
-0.593
0.553
(0.300)
(3.19)**
Some College
-0.122
0.885
-0.231
0.794
(0.990)
(1.890)
College
0.041
1.042
-0.022
0.978
(0.360)
(0.200)
Household Income Less Than $15k
-1.050
0.350
-0.390
0.677
(2.40)*
(0.880)
Household Income $15-$25k
-0.863
0.422
-0.310
0.733
(2.12)*
(0.740)
Household Income $25-$50k
-0.186
0.830
-0.317
0.728
(0.910)
(1.530)
Household Income $50-$75k
0.093
1.097
-0.126
0.882
(0.570)
(0.790)
Household Income $75-$100k
-0.046
0.955
0.050
1.051
(0.330)
(0.360)
Household Income $100-$125k
-0.046
0.955
0.001
1.001
(0.330)
0.000
Household Income $125-$150k
0.047
1.048
-0.020
0.980
(0.300)
(0.130)
Household Size=l
-0.159
0.853
-0.385
0.680
(0.270)
(0.660)
Household Size=2
-0.386
0.680
-0.540
0.583
(0.820)
(1.190)
Household Size=3
-0.294
0.745
-0.373
0.689
(0.630)
(0.830)
Household Size=4
-0.267
0.766
-0.303
0.739
(0.570)
(0.680)
Household Size=5
-0.474
0.623
-0.403
0.668
(1.010)
(0.890)
Household Size=6
0.119
1.126
-0.550
0.577
(0.220)
(1.080)
-------
EPA Fuel Economy Label Choice
Models
Understanding Questions 5 & 6
Dual Fuel PHEV Vehicle Label Compared With an Electric Vehicle Label
(Correct Answer=l, Incorrect Answer=0)
Correctly identified vehicle B, an
Electric Vehicle as better for 30-mile
round-trip compared to vehicle A, a
Dual Fuel Extended Range Electric
Vehicle.
Correctly identified vehicle A, a Dual
Fuel Extended Range Electric Vehicle
as better for 120-mile round-trip
compared to vehicle B, an Electric
Vehicle.
Independent Variables
Coefficient
(z-statistic)
Odds Ratio
Coefficient
(z-statistic)
Odds Ratio
Household Vehicles=l
-0.161
0.851
-0.386
0.680
(0.400)
(0.980)
Household Vehicles=2
-0.438
0.645
-0.252
0.777
(1.890)
(1.140)
Household Vehicles=3
-0.332
0.717
-0.273
0.761
(1.460)
(1.250)
Household Vehicles=4
-0.136
0.873
-0.280
0.756
(0.550)
(1.180)
Licensed Drivers in Household=l
-0.026
0.974
1.316
3.728
(0.050)
(2.46)*
Licensed Drivers in Household=2
0.328
1.388
0.959
2.609
(0.880)
(2.57)*
Licensed Drivers in Household=3
0.474
1.606
1.000
2.718
(1.290)
(2.73)**
Licensed Drivers in Household=4
0.014
1.014
0.714
2.042
(0.040)
(1.910)
Male
0.484
1.623
0.415
1.514
(5.17)**
(4.51)**
Daily Miles Driven, Less than 20
-0.134
0.875
-0.067
0.935
(0.440)
(0.230)
Daily Miles Driven, 20-30
-0.209
0.811
-0.170
0.844
(0.670)
(0.570)
Daily Miles Driven, 31-40
-0.177
0.838
-0.299
0.742
(0.570)
(0.980)
Daily Miles Driven, 41-50
-0.121
0.886
-0.219
0.803
(0.380)
(0.700)
Daily Miles Driven, 51-60
-0.179
0.836
-0.173
0.841
(0.540)
(0.540)
Daily Miles Driven, 61-70
-0.277
0.758
-0.341
0.711
(0.770)
(0.960)
Daily Miles Driven, 71-80
-0.224
0.799
0.032
1.033
(0.590)
(0.080)
Daily Miles Driven, 81-90
-0.290
0.748
-0.216
0.806
(0.670)
(0.500)
Daily Miles Driven, 91-100
-0.570
0.566
-0.809
0.445
(1.420)
(1.99)*
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 2
(7 =very important)
0.611
1.842
-0.180
0.835
(1.350)
(0.400)
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 3
(7 =very important)
0.066
1.068
-0.364
0.695
(0.160)
(0.860)
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 4
(7 =very important)
0.189
1.208
-0.278
0.757
(0.480)
(0.710)
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 5
(7 =very important)
0.329
1.390
-0.036
0.965
(0.830)
(0.090)
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 6
(7 =very important)
0.561
1.752
-0.156
0.856
(1.380)
(0.390)
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 7
(7 =very important)
0.375
1.455
-0.205
0.815
(0.900)
(0.500)
-------
EPA Fuel Economy Label Choice
Models
Understanding Questions 5 & 6
Dual Fuel PHEV Vehicle Label Compared With an Electric Vehicle Label
(Correct Answer=l, Incorrect Answer=0)
Correctly identified vehicle B, an
Electric Vehicle as better for 30-mile
round-trip compared to vehicle A, a
Dual Fuel Extended Range Electric
Vehicle.
Correctly identified vehicle A, a Dual
Fuel Extended Range Electric Vehicle
as better for 120-mile round-trip
compared to vehicle B, an Electric
Vehicle.
Independent Variables
Coefficient
(z-statistic)
Odds Ratio
Coefficient
(z-statistic)
Odds Ratio
Importance of Fuel Economy Label = 2
0.215
1.240
0.036
1.037
(0.750)
(0.130)
Importance of Fuel Economy Label = 3
0.453
1.573
0.114
1.121
(1.690)
(0.430)
Importance of Fuel Economy Label=4
0.360
1.433
0.076
1.079
(1.420)
(0.300)
Importance of Fuel Economy Label = 5
0.262
1.300
-0.139
0.870
(1.030)
(0.540)
Importance of Fuel Economy Label=6
0.188
1.207
-0.156
0.856
(0.710)
(0.590)
Importance of Fuel Economy Label=7
0.371
1.449
-0.229
0.795
(1.320)
(0.810)
Vehicles considered=Sports Car
-0.020
0.980
-0.101
0.904
(0.140)
(0.730)
Vehicles considered=Subcompact Car
0.045
1.046
0.390
1.477
(0.230)
(2.08)*
Vehicles considered=Compact Car
0.248
1.281
0.308
1.361
(1.99)*
(2.51)*
Vehicles considered=Midsized Car
0.164
1.178
0.256
1.292
(1.740)
(2.74)**
Vehicles considered=Large Car
-0.207
0.813
-0.023
0.977
(1.400)
(0.160)
Vehicles considered=Station Wagon
0.368
1.445
0.060
1.062
(1.660)
(0.280)
Vehicles considered=SUV
0.027
1.027
0.176
1.192
(0.280)
(1.830)
Vehicles considered=Crossover
0.027
1.027
0.385
1.470
(0.260)
(3.70)**
Vehicles considered=Pickup Truck
0.275
1.317
0.159
1.172
(1.860)
(1.110)
Vehicles considered=Mini-Van
0.038
1.039
0.381
1.464
(0.240)
(2.36)*
Vehicles considered=Van
-0.013
0.987
-1.060
0.346
(0.030)
(2.32)*
Vehicles considered=Other
0.548
1.730
0.230
1.259
(1.830)
(0.820)
Early Adopter=2 (1 is first to adopt)
0.060
1.062
0.461
1.586
(0.280)
(2.19)*
Early Adopter=3 (1 is first to adopt)
0.081
1.084
0.569
1.766
(0.400)
(2.82)**
Early Adopter=4 (1 is first to adopt)
0.073
1.076
0.529
1.697
(0.370)
(2.67)**
Early Adopter=5 (1 is first to adopt)
0.024
1.024
0.514
1.672
(0.120)
(2.52)*
Early Adopter=6 (1 is first to adopt)
-0.102
0.903
0.390
1.477
(0.450)
(1.700)
Early Adopter=7 (1 is first to adopt)
-0.107
0.899
0.331
1.392
(0.370)
(1.130)
Observations
2398
2378
Absolute value o statistics i parentheses
significant at 5% * significant at 1%
significant at 10% * significant at 5% si
-------
EPA Fuel Economy Label Choice
Models
Selection Questions 1 & 2
Advanced Technology Vehicle Choice Models
(Vehicle A Selected=l, Vehicle B Selected=0)
Selected Gasoline Vehicle over Dual Selected Gasoline Vehicle over Electric
Fuel Extended Range Electric Vehicle Vehicle
Independent Variables
Coefficient
(z-statistic)
Odds Ratio
Coefficient
(z-statistic)
Odds Ratio
Constant
0.192
1.212
1.106
3.022
(0.260)
(1.540)
Label 1 Dummy Variable
0.470
1.600
0.003
1.003
(4.12)**
(0.030)
Label 2 Dummy Variable
-0.120
0.887
0.362
1.436
(1.060)
(3.17)**
City Miles Share of Miles (e.g., 1-100)
-0.007
0.993
-0.004
0.996
(3.01)**
(1.660)
Age 18-24
-0.488
0.614
-0.590
0.554
(1.450)
(1.740)
Age 25-34
-0.515
0.598
-0.947
0.388
(2.27)*
(4.36)**
Age 35-44
-0.213
0.808
-0.547
0.579
(0.930)
(2.58)*
Age 45-54
0.020
1.020
-0.506
0.603
(0.090)
(2.52)*
Age 55-64
0.014
1.014
-0.511
0.600
(0.070)
(2.65)**
Less than High School
0.120
1.127
0.838
2.312
(0.140)
(1.080)
High School
-0.077
0.926
0.022
1.022
(0.390)
(0.110)
Some College
-0.103
0.902
0.092
1.096
(0.770)
(0.700)
College
-0.122
0.885
0.056
1.058
(1.020)
(0.470)
Household Income Less Than $15k
0.340
1.405
-0.174
0.840
(0.680)
(0.370)
Household Income $15-$25k
-0.007
0.993
-0.144
0.866
(0.020)
(0.320)
Household Income $25-$50k
0.286
1.331
-0.263
0.769
(1.300)
(1.170)
Household Income $50-$75k
0.238
1.269
-0.167
0.846
(1.390)
(0.970)
Household Income $75-$100k
0.080
1.083
0.029
1.029
(0.550)
(0.200)
Household Income $100-$125k
0.252
1.287
0.059
1.061
(1.670)
(0.400)
Household Income $125-$150k
0.043
1.044
0.019
1.019
(0.260)
(0.110)
Household Size=l
0.053
1.054
0.387
1.473
(0.090)
(0.630)
Household Size=2
-0.012
0.988
0.134
1.143
(0.030)
(0.280)
Household Size=3
0.025
1.025
0.392
1.480
(0.050)
(0.810)
Household Size=4
-0.073
0.930
0.073
1.076
(0.160)
(0.150)
Household Size=5
0.356
1.428
0.229
1.257
(0.750)
(0.470)
Household Size=6
-0.185
0.831
-0.344
0.709
(0.350)
(0.600)
-------
EPA Fuel Economy Label Choice
Models
Selection Questions 1 & 2
Advanced Technology Vehicle Choice Models
(Vehicle A Selected=l, Vehicle B Selected=0)
Selected Gasoline Vehicle over Dual Selected Gasoline Vehicle over Electric
Fuel Extended Range Electric Vehicle Vehicle
Independent Variables
Coefficient
(z-statistic)
Odds Ratio
Coefficient
(z-statistic)
Odds Ratio
Household Vehicles=l
0.648
1.912
0.536
1.709
(1.510)
(1.350)
Household Vehicles=2
0.356
1.428
-0.266
0.766
(1.490)
(1.170)
Household Vehicles=3
0.127
1.135
-0.347
0.707
(0.550)
(1.550)
Household Vehicles=4
0.203
1.225
-0.363
0.696
(0.800)
(1.480)
Licensed Drivers in Household = l
0.504
1.655
-0.256
0.774
(0.910)
(0.460)
Licensed Drivers in Household=2
0.609
1.839
0.057
1.059
(1.620)
(0.150)
Licensed Drivers in Household=3
0.799
2.223
0.051
1.052
(2.16)*
(0.130)
Licensed Drivers in Household=4
0.686
1.986
0.302
1.353
(1.820)
(0.780)
Male
0.135
1.145
0.190
1.209
(1.350)
(1.940)
Daily Miles Driven, Less than 20
-0.470
0.625
-1.099
0.333
(1.350)
(3.69)**
Daily Miles Driven, 20-30
-0.228
0.796
-0.812
0.444
(0.650)
(2.70)**
Daily Miles Driven, 31-40
-0.286
0.751
-1.034
0.356
(0.800)
(3.38)**
Daily Miles Driven, 41-50
-0.169
0.845
-1.050
0.350
(0.460)
(3.31)**
Daily Miles Driven, 51-60
-0.154
0.857
-0.977
0.376
(0.410)
(3.03)**
Daily Miles Driven, 61-70
0.150
1.162
-1.317
0.268
(0.360)
(3.55)**
Daily Miles Driven, 71-80
-0.219
0.803
-0.686
0.504
(0.510)
(1.840)
Daily Miles Driven, 81-90
0.303
1.354
-0.311
0.733
(0.580)
(0.740)
Daily Miles Driven, 91-100
0.568
1.765
-0.373
0.689
(1.110)
(0.950)
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 2
(7 =very important)
-0.411
0.663
-0.460
0.631
(0.870)
(1.010)
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 3
(7 =very important)
0.253
1.288
-0.155
0.856
(0.560)
(0.360)
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 4
(7 =very important)
0.487
1.627
-0.343
0.710
(1.150)
(0.860)
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 5
(7 =very important)
0.358
1.430
-0.490
0.613
(0.840)
(1.220)
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 6
(7 =very important)
0.711
2.036
-0.611
0.543
(1.630)
(1.490)
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 7
(7 =very important)
0.443
1.557
-0.562
0.570
(0.990)
(1.330)
-------
EPA Fuel Economy Label Choice
Models
Selection Questions 1 & 2
Advanced Technology Vehicle Choice Models
(Vehicle A Selected=l, Vehicle B Selected=0)
Selected Gasoline Vehicle over Dual Selected Gasoline Vehicle over Electric
Fuel Extended Range Electric Vehicle Vehicle
Independent Variables
Coefficient
(z-statistic)
Odds Ratio
Coefficient
(z-statistic)
Odds Ratio
Importance of Fuel Economy Label = 2
-0.046
0.955
-0.432
0.649
(0.150)
(1.460)
Importance of Fuel Economy Label = 3
0.013
1.013
-0.348
0.706
(0.040)
(1.280)
Importance of Fuel Economy Label=4
-0.481
0.618
-0.355
0.701
(1.690)
(1.370)
Importance of Fuel Economy Label = 5
-0.485
0.616
-0.307
0.736
(1.690)
(1.180)
Importance of Fuel Economy Label=6
-0.453
0.636
-0.394
0.674
(1.510)
(1.450)
Importance of Fuel Economy Label=7
-0.589
0.555
-0.660
0.517
(1.880)
(2.25)*
Vehicles considered=Sports Car
-0.014
0.986
0.051
1.052
(0.090)
(0.340)
Vehicles considered=Subcompact Car
0.145
1.156
0.152
1.164
(0.710)
(0.770)
Vehicles considered=Compact Car
-0.024
0.976
0.032
1.033
(0.180)
(0.240)
Vehicles considered=Midsized Car
-0.107
0.899
0.098
1.103
(1.070)
(0.990)
Vehicles considered=Large Car
0.052
1.053
0.055
1.057
(0.320)
(0.350)
Vehicles considered=Station Wagon
0.330
1.391
-0.019
0.981
(1.380)
(0.080)
Vehicles considered=SUV
-0.110
0.896
0.085
1.089
(1.060)
(0.830)
Vehicles considered=Crossover
0.081
1.084
0.206
1.229
(0.720)
(1.870)
Vehicles considered=Pickup Truck
0.129
1.138
0.160
1.174
(0.820)
(1.060)
Vehicles considered=Mini-Van
-0.189
0.828
0.199
1.220
(1.110)
(1.180)
Vehicles considered=Van
-0.219
0.803
-0.358
0.699
(0.510)
(0.760)
Vehicles considered=Other
-0.193
0.824
-0.246
0.782
(0.660)
(0.770)
Early Adopter=2 (1 is first to adopt)
0.280
1.323
0.373
1.452
(1.300)
(1.630)
Early Adopter=3 (1 is first to adopt)
0.068
1.070
0.137
1.147
(0.330)
(0.620)
Early Adopter=4 (1 is first to adopt)
0.597
1.817
0.389
1.476
(2.92)**
(1.790)
Early Adopter=5 (1 is first to adopt)
0.360
1.433
0.209
1.232
(1.720)
(0.940)
Early Adopter=6 (1 is first to adopt)
0.710
2.034
0.233
1.262
(2.90)**
(0.930)
Early Adopter=7 (1 is first to adopt)
0.034
1.035
0.642
1.900
(0.110)
(2.09)*
Observations
2404
2404
Absolute value o statistics i parentheses
significant at 5% * significant at 1%
significant at 10% * significant at 5% si
-------
EPA Fuel Economy Label Choice
Models
Selection Questions 3 & 4
Advanced Technology Vehicle Choice Models
(Vehicle A Selected = l, Vehicle B Selected=0)
Selected Dual Fuel Extended Range
Electric Vehicle over Electric Vehicle
Selected Dual Fuel Extended Range
Electric Vehicle over Electric Vehicle
Independent Variables
Coefficient
(z-statistic)
Odds Ratio
Coefficient
(z-statistic)
Odds Ratio
Constant
Label 1 Dummy Variable
Label 2 Dummy Variable
City Miles Share of Miles (e.g., 1-100)
Age 18-24
Age 25-34
Age 35-44
Age 45-54
Age 55-64
Less than High School
High School
Some College
College
Household Income Less Than $15k
Household Income $15-$25k
Household Income $25-$50k
Household Income $50-$75k
Household Income $75-$100k
Household Income $100-$125k
Household Income $125-$150k
Household Size=l
Household Size=2
Household Size=3
Household Size=4
Household Size=5
Household Size=6
0.839
(1.220)
0.088
(0.870)
0.377
(3.52)**
-0.001
(0.310)
-0.145
(0.460)
-0.350
(1.700)
-0.396
(1.930)
-0.094
(0.490)
-0.198
(1.060)
-0.231
(0.320)
-0.055
(0.300)
-0.077
(0.630)
0.111
(1.010)
-0.605
(1.360)
-0.002
0.000
-0.186
(0.910)
-0.124
(0.790)
-0.058
(0.430)
0.001
0.000
-0.043
(0.280)
0.190
(0.340)
0.128
(0.290)
0.274
(0.630)
0.132
(0.300)
0.225
(0.510)
0.110
(0.220)
2.314
1.092
1.458
0.999
0.865
0.705
0.673
0.910
0.820
0.794
0.946
0.926
1.117
0.546
0.998
0.830
0.883
0.944
1.001
0.958
1.209
1.137
1.315
1.141
1.252
1.116
-1.669
(2.21)*
-0.056
(0.530)
-0.055
(0.490)
0.007
(3.27)**
0.224
(0.700)
0.098
(0.460)
0.113
(0.530)
0.036
(0.180)
-0.317
(1.590)
-0.142
(0.170)
0.253
(1.340)
0.092
(0.710)
0.249
(2.14)*
0.177
(0.400)
-0.210
(0.510)
-0.097
(0.460)
-0.123
(0.750)
-0.176
(1.220)
-0.095
(0.660)
0.081
(0.510)
0.866
(1.440)
0.506
(1.040)
0.415
(0.860)
0.238
(0.490)
0.173
(0.350)
0.481
(0.890)
0.188
0.946
0.946
1.007
1.251
1.103
1.120
1.037
0.728
0.868
1.288
1.096
1.283
1.194
0.811
0.908
0.884
0.839
0.909
1.084
2.377
1.659
1.514
1.269
1.189
1.618
-------
EPA Fuel Economy Label Choice
Models
Selection Questions 3 & 4
Advanced Technology Vehicle Choice Models
(Vehicle A Selected = l, Vehicle B Selected=0)
Selected Dual Fuel Extended Range Selected Dual Fuel Extended Range
Electric Vehicle over Electric Vehicle Electric Vehicle over Electric Vehicle
Independent Variables
Coefficient
(z-statistic)
Odds Ratio
Coefficient
(z-statistic)
Odds Rat
Household Vehicles=l
-0.845
0.430
-0.032
0.969
(2.09)*
(0.080)
Household Vehicles=2
-0.391
0.676
0.241
1.273
(1.780)
(1.010)
Household Vehicles=3
-0.358
0.699
0.355
1.426
(1.660)
(1.520)
Household Vehicles=4
-0.399
0.671
-0.103
0.902
(1.700)
(0.400)
Licensed Drivers in Household = l
0.826
2.284
-0.622
0.537
(1.580)
(1.150)
Licensed Drivers in Household=2
0.072
1.075
-0.607
0.545
(0.200)
(1.620)
Licensed Drivers in Household=3
0.156
1.169
-0.455
0.634
(0.440)
(1.240)
Licensed Drivers in Household=4
-0.028
0.972
-0.367
0.693
(0.080)
(0.970)
Male
0.164
1.178
-0.089
0.915
(1.800)
(0.930)
Daily Miles Driven, Less than 20
-1.025
0.359
0.296
1.344
(3.35)**
(0.860)
Daily Miles Driven, 20-30
-0.761
0.467
0.360
1.433
(2.46)*
(1.040)
Daily Miles Driven, 31-40
-1.023
0.360
0.242
1.274
(3.27)**
(0.690)
Daily Miles Driven, 41-50
-1.298
0.273
0.523
1.687
(4.02)**
(1.460)
Daily Miles Driven, 51-60
-0.865
0.421
0.430
1.537
(2.64)**
(1.180)
Daily Miles Driven, 61-70
-1.106
0.331
0.199
1.220
(3.05)**
(0.490)
Daily Miles Driven, 71-80
-0.573
0.564
0.223
1.250
(1.520)
(0.530)
Daily Miles Driven, 81-90
-0.795
0.452
0.342
1.408
(1.850)
(0.710)
Daily Miles Driven, 91-100
-0.275
0.760
0.096
1.101
(0.680)
(0.210)
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 2
(7 =very important)
-0.428
0.652
0.723
2.061
(0.960)
(1.540)
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 3
(7 =very important)
0.014
1.014
0.077
1.080
(0.030)
(0.170)
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 4
(7 =very important)
-0.204
0.815
0.303
1.354
(0.520)
(0.720)
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 5
(7 =very important)
-0.321
0.725
0.254
1.289
(0.810)
(0.600)
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 6
(7 =very important)
-0.161
0.851
0.030
1.030
(0.400)
(0.070)
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 7
(7 =very important)
-0.442
0.643
0.233
1.262
(1.070)
(0.520)
-------
EPA Fuel Economy Label Choice
Models
Selection Questions 3 & 4
Advanced Technology Vehicle Choice Models
(Vehicle A Selected = l, Vehicle B Selected=0)
Selected Dual Fuel Extended Range Selected Dual Fuel Extended Range
Electric Vehicle over Electric Vehicle Electric Vehicle over Electric Vehicle
Independent Variables
Coefficient
(z-statistic)
Odds Ratio
Coefficient
(z-statistic)
Odds Ratio
Importance of Fuel Economy Label = 2
-0.132
0.876
-0.052
0.949
(0.460)
(0.180)
Importance of Fuel Economy Label = 3
-0.273
0.761
-0.139
0.870
(1.030)
(0.500)
Importance of Fuel Economy Label=4
-0.022
0.978
-0.118
0.889
(0.090)
(0.440)
Importance of Fuel Economy Label = 5
-0.135
0.874
-0.039
0.962
(0.530)
(0.150)
Importance of Fuel Economy Label=6
-0.276
0.759
-0.043
0.958
(1.040)
(0.160)
Importance of Fuel Economy Label=7
-0.270
0.763
-0.062
0.940
(0.960)
(0.210)
Vehicles considered=Sports Car
-0.118
0.889
0.072
1.075
(0.850)
(0.510)
Vehicles considered=Subcompact Car
0.155
1.168
-0.131
0.877
(0.850)
(0.680)
Vehicles considered=Compact Car
0.138
1.148
0.099
1.104
(1.150)
(0.790)
Vehicles considered=Midsized Car
0.041
1.042
0.169
1.184
(0.450)
(1.760)
Vehicles considered=Large Car
-0.039
0.962
-0.220
0.803
(0.270)
(1.380)
Vehicles considered=Station Wagon
-0.029
0.971
-0.242
0.785
(0.140)
(1.050)
Vehicles considered=SUV
0.003
1.003
-0.040
0.961
(0.030)
(0.400)
Vehicles considered=Crossover
0.411
1.508
-0.221
0.802
(4.02)**
(2.00)*
Vehicles considered=Pickup Truck
0.068
1.070
-0.087
0.917
(0.480)
(0.580)
Vehicles considered=Mini-Van
0.093
1.097
-0.111
0.895
(0.590)
(0.650)
Vehicles considered=Van
-0.116
0.890
0.350
1.419
(0.280)
(0.850)
Vehicles considered=Other
0.208
1.231
0.284
1.328
(0.760)
(1.010)
Early Adopter=2 (1 is first to adopt)
0.375
1.455
0.200
1.221
(1.780)
(0.920)
Early Adopter=3 (1 is first to adopt)
0.323
1.381
0.125
1.133
(1.610)
(0.600)
Early Adopter=4 (1 is first to adopt)
0.517
1.677
-0.048
0.953
(2.61)**
(0.230)
Early Adopter=5 (1 is first to adopt)
0.242
1.274
0.068
1.070
(1.180)
(0.320)
Early Adopter=6 (1 is first to adopt)
0.327
1.387
0.100
1.105
(1.430)
(0.420)
Early Adopter=7 (1 is first to adopt)
0.451
1.570
0.194
1.214
(1.560)
(0.650)
Observations
2400
2404
Absolute value o statistics i parentheses
significant at 5% * significant at 1%
significant at 10% * significant at 5% si
-------
EPA Fuel Economy Label Choice
Models
Understanding Questions fl-6')
Pooled Understanding Questions
Independent Variables
Coefficient
(z-statistic)
Odds Ratio
Constant
-0.324
0.723
(1.160)
Label 1 Dummy Variable
-0.119
0.888
(2.89)**
Label 2 Dummy Variable
0.232
1.261
(5.30)**
City Miles Share of Miles (e.g., 1-100)
-0.001
0.999
(1.330)
Age 18-24
-0.161
0.851
(1.270)
Age 25-34
-0.069
0.933
(0.820)
Age 35-44
-0.099
0.906
(1.180)
Age 45-54
-0.065
0.937
(0.820)
Age 55-64
0.038
1.039
(0.490)
Less than High School
-0.621
0.537
(2.04)*
High School
-0.252
0.777
(3.46)**
Some College
-0.136
0.873
(2.74)**
College
-0.025
0.975
(0.550)
Household Income Less Than $15k
-0.294
0.745
(1.680)
Household Income $15-$25k
-0.573
0.564
(3.43)**
Household Income $25-$50k
-0.109
0.897
(1.330)
Household Income $50-$75k
0.057
1.059
(0.890)
Household Income $75-$100k
0.053
1.054
(0.960)
Household Income $100-$125k
0.091
1.095
(1.620)
Household Income $125-$150k
0.115
1.122
(1.830)
Household Size=l
-0.073
0.930
(0.320)
Household Size=2
-0.183
0.833
(1.020)
Household Size=3
-0.038
0.963
(0.210)
Household Size=4
-0.046
0.955
(0.260)
Household Size=5
-0.062
0.940
(0.340)
Household Size=6
0.020
1.020
(0.100)
-------
EPA Fuel Economy Label Choice
Models
Understanding Questions fl-6')
Pooled Understanding Questions
Independent Variables
Coefficient
(z-statistic)
Odds Ratio
Household Vehicles=l
-0.269
0.764
(1.680)
Household Vehicles=2
-0.286
0.751
(3.16)**
Household Vehicles=3
-0.270
0.763
(3.04)**
Household Vehicles=4
-0.240
0.787
(2.49)*
Licensed Drivers in Household = l
0.708
2.030
(3.33)**
Licensed Drivers in Household = 2
0.531
1.701
(3.64)**
Licensed Drivers in Household = 3
0.526
1.692
(3.68)**
Licensed Drivers in Household=4
0.343
1.409
(2.35)*
Male
0.390
1.477
(10.46)**
Daily Miles Driven, Less than 20
-0.025
0.975
(0.210)
Daily Miles Driven, 20-30
-0.072
0.931
(0.590)
Daily Miles Driven, 31-40
-0.146
0.864
(1.180)
Daily Miles Driven, 41-50
-0.079
0.924
(0.620)
Daily Miles Driven, 51-60
-0.069
0.933
(0.530)
Daily Miles Driven, 61-70
-0.210
0.811
(1.460)
Daily Miles Driven, 71-80
-0.152
0.859
(1.000)
Daily Miles Driven, 81-90
-0.221
0.802
(1.280)
Daily Miles Driven, 91-100
-0.286
0.751
(1.780)
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 2
(7 =very important)
0.254
1.289
(1.400)
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 3
(7 =very important)
-0.036
0.965
(0.210)
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 4
(7 =very important)
0.083
1.087
(0.520)
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 5
(7 =very important)
0.192
1.212
(1.190)
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 6
(7 =very important)
0.189
1.208
(1.150)
Importance of Fuel Economy rated 7
(7 =very important)
0.059
1.061
(0.350)
-------
EPA Fuel Economy Label Choice
Models
Understanding Questions fl-6')
Pooled Understanding Questions
Independent Variables
Coefficient
(z-statistic)
Odds Ratio
Importance of Fuel Economy Label = 2
0.123
1.131
(1.050)
Importance of Fuel Economy Label = 3
0.067
1.069
(0.620)
Importance of Fuel Economy Label=4
-0.028
0.972
(0.270)
Importance of Fuel Economy Label = 5
-0.035
0.966
(0.340)
Importance of Fuel Economy Label=6
0.018
1.018
(0.160)
Importance of Fuel Economy Label=7
0.003
1.003
(0.030)
Vehicles considered=Sports Car
-0.133
0.875
(2.39)*
Vehicles considered=Subcompact Car
0.121
1.129
(1.590)
Vehicles considered=Compact Car
0.240
1.271
(4.85)**
Vehicles considered=Midsized Car
0.109
1.115
(2.91)**
Vehicles considered=Large Car
0.032
1.033
(0.540)
Vehicles considered=Station Wagon
0.118
1.125
(1.370)
Vehicles considered=SUV
0.059
1.061
(1.530)
Vehicles considered=Crossover
0.154
1.166
(3.65)**
Vehicles considered=Pickup Truck
0.059
1.061
(1.020)
Vehicles considered=Mini-Van
0.136
1.146
(2.11)*
Vehicles considered=Van
-0.342
0.710
(2.05)*
Vehicles considered=Other
0.254
1.289
(2.23)*
Early Adopter=2 (1 is first to adopt)
0.122
1.130
(1.460)
Early Adopter=3 (1 is first to adopt)
0.297
1.346
(3.72)**
Early Adopter=4 (1 is first to adopt)
0.196
1.217
(2.50)*
Early Adopter=5 (1 is first to adopt)
0.183
1.201
(2.27)*
Early Adopter=6 (1 is first to adopt)
0.121
1.129
(1.330)
Early Adopter=7 (1 is first to adopt)
-0.116
0.890
(1.000)
Observations 14,281
Absolute value o statistics in parentheses
significant at 5% ** significant at 1%
significant at 10% * significant at 5% si
------- |