Thursday, October 1, 2026
There are a lot of 2- and 3-year-old electric vehicles on the market now, and they can be extremely good deals.
In 2022, Congress passed the (absurdly named) Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). This created strong incentives to buy electric vehicles, along with incentives for energy efficiency, wind, solar, and other energy innovations.
If you were buying a electric vehicle, you could only get the incentives for cars that were built in the USA. But a workaround was allowed for “commercial” vehicles, which was interpreted to mean you could get them for any EV that was owned by a company and leased to you. As a result, Kia, Hyundai, and other EV model sales and leases soared along with sales of Tesla, Ford and Chevrolet EVs. EV sales and leases doubled between 2021 and 2023.
Electric vehicles get 3-4 miles per kilowatt-hour. They can charge at home inexpensively, working out to the equivalent of about $1.50 per gallon for gasoline. Or they can be charged at increasingly common public charging stations, but these cost about twice as much — still a deal compared with gasoline.
Many of these two and three year leases are now coming to term, and while some people who leased these cars are keeping them, many are returning them to the dealers (often in exchange for newer EVs). That means there's is a wave of 2- and 3-year old EVs available now.
A few examples:
Tesla Y: The Tesla Y is a mid-sized four door SUV the best selling EV in the U.S. A new base model costs $40,000., but you can buy a 2-year old one with 30,000 miles on it for $30,000.
Nissan Leaf: The Leaf is a great four-door sedan. A new one sells for $32,000 or more; a 3-year old Leaf, with under 20,000 miles, can be found for less than $20,000.
Kia Niro: The Niro is a small station wagon, which has been available as a hybrid, plug-in hybrid, or EV. A new Niro EV sells for about $38,000. A two-year lease-return with less than 20,000 miles can be bought for $25,000
Chevy Bolt: The Bolt is a compact four-door hatchback. A new slightly improved version soon to be released, is expected to sell for about $35,000. Two-year lease-return Bolts with less than 20,000 miles are now selling for $21,000.
Hyundai Ioniq 5: The Ioniq 5 is a mid-sized four-door sedan, with excellent performance, comfort, and range. A new one sells for about $45,000, but you can now buy one that's been leased for two years with 20,000 miles on it for $28,000.
Shopping for a used EV isn't difficult. Websites like www.autotrader.com and www.cars.com show listings from hundreds of dealers and thousands of individuals. A couple of car dealers specialize in used EVs, like Paramount Motors Northwest and Legend Auto Sales in Seattle, and Platt Auto Group in Portland. Hertz also has a significant number of EVs for sale in their national inventory.
Things to look for include:
If you'd like to talk with someone who's actually owned and driven one of these cars about their experience with it, feel free to email us at olycrlg@gmail.com. We hope you find a steal of a deal, and are happy with your “new” EV.
Jim Lazar, Wayne Olsen and Thad Curtz of the Thurston Climate Action Team EV Action Group.
The opinions expressed above are those of the writers and not necessarily those of The JOLT's staff or board of directors. Got something to say about a topic of interest to Thurston County residents? Send it to us and we’ll most likely publish it. Click here to email to us.
5 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
JohnGear
Funny timing, I just did this calculation today — got my PSE bill and — despite their best efforts to make it an ordeal — I was finally able to add up all the various charges and credits from the PSE bill to arrive at the final cost of a residential kWh, which I multiplied by the cost of a full charge on my plug-in hybrid vehicle (14.5 kWh for full charge). I get about 40 miles on a full charge.
0.148363+0.009409+0.038713-0.006648-0.002378=0.187459 $/kWh PSE residential electric
0.187459 $/kWh × 14.5 kWh full charge =2.7181555 per full charge.
So I get a much higher figure than you do ($2.72 for 40 miles vs. $1.50) but either way, it’s a bargain.
And since my electric is from solar panels on the roof, it’s all clean.
We charge using house current (110v) since I’m too cheap to spring for a faster charger when the house current works just fine. I get a full charge in about 12 hours. Of course, if you go full EV, you probably do need the Level II charger or you’ll really have to organize your life around when you can recharge.
So we’re really happy with our plug-in hybrid. Except for a drive to San Diego and back, we haven’t bought a drop of gasoline since February when we got the new car. Anyone who is considering it should go for it, especially a low-mileage used EV or plug-in hybrid.
Monday, August 3 Report this
ScottWall
We purchased a slightly used EV (2 years old, ~21,000 miles on odometer) about ten months ago. Cost ~ $29,000. We use it for most of our driving leaving the two internal combustion vehicles parked the vast majority of the time.
After installing a level 2 charger (50 amp breaker needed) for home charging have never charged anywhere else. Cost to operate after ~ 8000 mies is a little over $20.00 per month.
Could not be happier. Love the seat massage and ample roominess too.
Tuesday, August 4 Report this
36098501
This piece is presented as an economic analysis, but it largely omits the economics. This has become a common re-occurrence locally to push desired narratives – even in the cases where a more thorough analysis might get one to the same conclusions.
This is another example of where our functional expertise of economic analysis in Olympia is lacking and hurting the nuanced conversations that have to happen in many different aspects of local issues. I am not an economist. I have just extended the conversation to include a more rigorous analysis.
Comparing gasoline costs to electricity costs is not a total cost of ownership analysis. It is a comparison of just one operating expense while leaving out many of the largest expected costs that determine whether an EV is actually the better financial decision.
Ironically, the assumptions used here already favor EVs. Washington has some of the highest gasoline prices in the country, top 3 with Hawaii and California, about $4.75 per gallon, roughly $1.00-$1.25 above the national average. This is driven by a combination of fuel taxes, regional market conditions, and the costs associated with Washington's Climate Commitment Act.
At 15,000 miles per year, a 30 mpg vehicle spends about $2,375 annually on gasoline. A comparable EV charged at current Puget Sound Energy residential rates of roughly 20¢/kWh spends about $800 annually, creating approximately $1,575 in annual fuel savings.
Those savings are real and important, but fall short of any attempt at economic rigor.
The analysis becomes incomplete when it effectively stops there.
A competent economic evaluation asks a different question: What is the expected lifetime cost of ownership? That requires accounting for every material cost—not simply the one that produces the most favorable comparison.
Expected Cost (15,000 miles/year) EV Hybrid (50 mpg) Gas (30 mpg)
Fuel/Energy $800 $1,425 $2,375
WA EV registration fees +$225 Baseline Baseline
Higher insurance +$400 Baseline Baseline
Additional tire wear +$300 Minimal Baseline
Home charger (10-year amortized ) +$200 No needed Not needed
Public charging premium (if used regularly) +$500 Not needed Not needed
Charging time (10 hrs @ $30/hr) +$300 Not needed Not needed
Higher collision repair costs +$1000(estimate)Lower Baseline
Limited local certified repair network Higher inconvenience Low Low
Grid expansion & utility infrastructure Shared by ratepayers Minimal Not needed
Even using assumptions that strongly favor EV ownership, the fuel savings can be substantially reduced once the expected costs of ownership are included. That doesn't mean EVs are a poor choice. It means the answer depends on the consumer's circumstances—exactly why economists perform total cost of ownership analyses instead of fuel-cost comparisons.
The article also ignores the strongest competitor: today's hybrids. A vehicle achieving 50 mpg cuts fuel costs by about 40% compared with a conventional gasoline car while avoiding charging infrastructure, charging delays, higher insurance premiums, specialized repair networks, and many of the infrastructure constraints associated with battery-electric vehicles.
A complete economic analysis would also distinguish between private costs and public costs. Widespread transportation electrification requires large investments in generating capacity, transmission, substations, neighborhood transformers, and charging infrastructure. Those costs do not disappear; they are ultimately borne through utility rates, taxes, or both. They belong in any serious cost-benefit analysis.
Friday, August 7 Report this
36098501
I think it is important to point out I’m not an expert, an academic, nor an economist.
That is part of the reason I get concerned when those who claim to be, fall short of very basic analysis on local issues. If it happens in cases like this, where an EV might in fact be a great option on its merits, what happens when a controversial topic requires some depth of expertise to educate the public about competing controversial alternatives.
What I mentioned above is also not a complete picture as it leaves out the environmental impacts of gas cars, battery manufacturing, battery recycling and the complexities and costs of alternative green power options. It is absolutely not a complete picture, or analysis either - nor is it intended to be. Most importantly, it demonstrates there are important nuances to consider that often get missed in these local conversations.
My point is that the people we expect to explain these complexities often fall short - especially in Olympia where statewide political narratives often begin. The writers in this case often fall into the same category - I might agree with their conclusion, but the path they took to get there was incomplete and in some cases just obviously wrong to anyone adjacent to the topic. So, if they are wrong on topics I have some knowledge of, I'm less likely to believe the arguments they make when it is a topic I know little to nothing about. This is a big problem.
An example. I agreed with Mr. Lazar's good point in previous opinion piece that the MFTE deserves some hard conversations. The arguments he used to get there were wrong - and clearly wrong to anyone looking for an apartment or housing in Olympia. If you have some experience in the local rental market, it was an easy way to understand that he was entirely disconnected from the issue he spoke about as an expert, but wanted to make a political point about the MFTE. A point I agree with, but not with the arguments he provided.
Olympia has anything but a glut of any type of housing because it is so difficult and expensive to build here. This helps explain why we can onboard hundreds of new units of expensive market rate apartments in the City and they are partially leased up before they are completed, and stabilized within the next 4 - 5 months. Inventory sits at 3-5% vacancy which is in line with normal turnover in the multifamily space and low relative to other City's.
https://www.thejoltnews.com/stories/thurston-county-has-plenty-of-market-rate-apartments,18828?
My concern is that these are the same voices we here often in Olympia that provide an incomplete picture that can be quite misleading to those looking for, or needing, expert insight - especially when they introduce themselves as experts in these areas.
This is the predictable consequence of living in a government town with so many people involved in government service, government policy making, lawyers, lobbyists and various political organizations but few functional experts in business, accounting, economics and finance. It is limiting and a constraint on local public policy.
Strong communities need private sector economists, entrepreneurs, builders, lenders, manufacturers, accountants, and business owners in the discussion - not simply more public and policy administrators, lawyers, lobbyists and organizations designing systems for other administrators to manage.
Diversity of professional experience and expertise is critically important in the process. Without it, government develops blind spots that create the unintended consequences locally that also become expensive for everyone further hurting affordability. Olympia is unfriendly to these groups and is the reason so few of them are willing to take on the personal risk of getting involved.
I would have more confidence if those involved in local politics would be critical when things don't go as they intended. Mr. Lazar was a primary advocate and leader for the 3% increase to a 9% Utility Tax back in 2005 to fund sidewalks and parks. We all want more sidewalks and parks, but the campaign was very controversial at the time.
The same goes with other aspects of Community issues.
While we can debate the merits of taxing a basic life necessity and its impact on affordability, the tax had a specific list of projects it was intended to be used for. Unfortunately, a significant amount of that money ended up in the Fones Road project and not in the sidewalks that the voters thought they were paying for.
I don't see articles, or opinion pieces, critical of the City's use of taxpayer money. We need honest analysis and debate up front, and honest conversations about accountability once implemented. We often get neither because due to some systemic issues, Olympia gets very little diversity from the City Council and the City Committees that support it. Consequently, they see community issues through a very narrow lens that leads to the results we see all around us everyday.
https://www.thejoltnews.com/stories/olympia-committee-weighs-shared-responsibility-for-sidewalk-repairs,29304
https://www.thejoltnews.com/stories/help-shape-sidewalk-repair-policy-in-olympia,28344?
Buy an EV. They are great cars, but don’t attach an environmental or political aspect to the fair economic analysts of both. It’s good to have innovation and diversity,
If we sold our gas cars and all went and bought an EV tomorrow, it would take down the grid and the full EV supply chain.
Don't listen to me, I'm nobody, but pull in some people with functional expertise, ask some hard questions and facilitate some honest economic and environment analysis that lacks a predominantly political lens.
The Community will be better off, and much less divided.
Friday, August 7 Report this
DaveinOlyWA
AS ALWAYS, the knee jerk reaction of gassers in a vain attempt to justify their misbegotten vehicle choices is comically tragic in their grossly inaccurate analysis.
Because my current situation is highly unusual and makes a huge advantage unrealistic, I will only comment on my situation before my last move 26 months ago.
I have been doing electric since Oct 13, 2007 starting with a ZENN; a MAJOR compromise in transportation. But still managed to use it as my daily commuter for 3½ years. On Jan 18, 2011 I was one of the first 5 in WA to take delivery of the Nissan LEAF. Still a major challenge especially since this was 6-14 months before the very thin DC network showed up. I knew it wasn't a viable long term option, so I leased.
again
and again
and again.
But the Plus showed up and I well...leased again (was only way to take full advantage of the incentives of the day) but unlike the previous 3 year leases, I did a two year only because interest rates were microscopic at the time but I had zero confidence they would stay that way much longer.
At the end of my two years, I bought the Plus off lease at 1¼% interest.
I had also signed up for PSE's TOU pilot. It was again... my special circumstance that made it a MUCH better choice than most people. On the program, my LEAF charged for about 6 cents/kwh. The flipside was very high peak power rates but I worked Swing shift so I slept thru the morning peak rates, was at work for the afternoon peak rates so yeah...result? A 25% drop in my electric bill.
Since I leased previously, I had essentially no maintenance costs other than wiper fluid and wiper blades.
But the Plus is a different story. She turns 7 next month and I have replaced tires and last week, the 12 volt battery so for the first time, I have an EV that has exceeded $100 in total maintenance costs.
The tire comment? Well, I can only say my OEM's were rated at 70,000 miles, I replaced them at 60,000 miles despite the fact they had tread...prob at least 5K or so but they was also on her 5th birthday which is generally when tires should be aged out so off they went.
I am now retired since Dec 2025 and dashing for cash. My new place doesn't have utility bills so I can only try to calculate what part of the rent I should apply to the "fuel" my car uses. Not an easy thing to do as I am monitoring the rental market and I appear to be paying under it ;)
Wednesday, September 9 Report this