As electric vehicles (EVs) continue to reshape the automotive industry, many readers expect journalists to highlight one of the most important factors—fuel cost savings. Yet, when it comes to comparing fully electric cars (BEVs) with hybrid electric cars (HEVs), journalists often avoid direct fuel-cost comparisons.

This raises an interesting question: Why don’t EV journalists put fuel costs head-to-head in their reviews?
The answer lies in several practical, technical, and regional factors that make such comparisons far more complicated than they seem.

---

1. Electricity Prices Are Highly Variable

Unlike petrol or diesel prices, which are relatively stable across regions, electricity costs vary tremendously based on:

• Country

• State or region

• Time of day

• Charger type (home charging vs public charging)

• Billing slabs and peak-hour pricing

A BEV charged at home during off-peak hours may cost 90% less to run compared to a hybrid. But using a commercial DC fast charger could make it as expensive—or even more expensive—than petrol.

This variability makes a single “fuel cost comparison” misleading for a global audience.

---

2. Charging Methods Differ Greatly

A BEV user may charge via:

• Home wall box

• Public AC charger

• Public DC fast charger

• Free charging at malls or workplaces

• Renewable energy at home (solar)

Each method has a different cost per unit.
Meanwhile, hybrid vehicles rely on:

• Petrol

• Some regenerative braking

• Very limited electric-only range

Creating a “fair” comparison becomes nearly impossible because EV owners have drastically different charging habits.

---

3. BEVs and Hybrids Serve Different Audiences

Journalists typically compare cars that compete in the same segment.
But BEVs and hybrids appeal to different buyer categories:

Since the ownership profiles differ so much, journalists prefer evaluating them separately to avoid confusing buyers.

---

4. Fuel Efficiency Standards Are Not Directly Comparable

A hybrid’s fuel economy is measured in km/l, while an EV’s efficiency is measured in Wh/km or km/kWh.
To compare them, journalists must convert:

• Electricity cost per kWh

• Vehicle efficiency

• Petrol/diesel cost per liter

But this conversion doesn’t represent real-world driving because hybrids and EVs perform differently in:

• Traffic

• Highway speeds

• Weather

• Terrain

A “unified efficiency metric” simply doesn’t exist yet.

---

5. Real-World Driving Conditions Skew the Results

EVs excel in:

• City traffic

• Regenerative braking

• Low-speed commutes

Hybrids excel in:

• Highway driving

• Long journeys

• Cold weather where EV range drops

Because performance changes so much with conditions, any fuel comparison risks being inaccurate or biased.

---

6. It Can Lead to Misleading Buyer Expectations

If journalists say:

“An EV is cheaper to run than a hybrid.”

Buyers may assume that applies universally—when in many markets, charging costs (especially DC fast charging) are higher than petrol.

Similarly, a hybrid may appear cheaper to run in a high-electricity-cost region but not in a different region.

To avoid incorrect assumptions, journalists avoid definitive cost comparisons.

---

7. Focus is Often on Technology, Not Cost

EV journalism tends to highlight:

• Battery range

• Charging speed

• Motor power

• Software features

• Driving experience

Fuel cost is only one part of the ownership experience. Instead, journalists prioritize technological innovation, environmental benefits, and user convenience.

---

8. Manufacturers Rarely Provide Comparable Data

Carmakers publish:

• Certified fuel economy for hybrids

• Certified range & efficiency for EVs

But they do not provide:

• Real-world cost per km

• Charging cost benchmarks

Journalists cannot compare what manufacturers themselves do not standardize.

---

Final Thoughts

EV journalists avoid direct fuel-cost comparisons between BEVs and hybrids because the variables are simply too many, too inconsistent, and too region-dependent. While comparing costs sounds simple, the real-world picture is far too complex to summarize in a single, universally accurate metric.