By on May 15, 2014

Salesman With Customer

In its annual Your Driving Costs study, AAA says the cost of owning and operating a vehicle has fallen on the back of lower fuel prices, though its findings leave a little to be desired with current fuel costs.

USA Today reports the methodology behind AAA’s study uses fuel prices from the final three months of the outgoing year. In 2013, prices were beginning to peak during the collection period, peaking earlier this year before falling to current levels. The club’s manager of technical services, Michael Calkins, acknowleged as much during this year’s announcement, but stated that AAA uses its preferred methodology “for consistency in the results.”

Other factors in lowered O&O costs in this year’s study include the increased fuel efficiency in newer vehicles — a result of increasing CAFE targets — as well as lower tire costs. Also noted: Insurance costs remained stable while depreciation fell 1.71 percent to $3,510 per year for the first five years, and maintenance costs climbed 2 percent to 5.06 cents per mile.

As for the cost of ownership for 2014, sedan owners will see a 2.7 percent decrease overall, with an average cost of 59.2 cents per mile and $8,876 per year based upon 15,000 miles driven annually.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

12 Comments on “AAA Study: Cost Of Ownership Falls In 2014 Due To Lower Fuel Prices...”


  • avatar

    One of the main factors leading to reduction in fuel costs is the hydraulic fracturing process allowing us to get more oil out of wells. Imagine how much lower oil prices could be if we had a president OK the Keystone XL pipeline.

    Jobs for Canadians. Jobs for Americans. Economic benefits all around.

    And as for the treehuggers:

    Pushing oil through pipelines uses less fossil fuels than shipping it or trucking it.

    Why u no approve of Keystone XL?

    • 0 avatar
      VoGo

      Hey there, Emperor Nero,
      We are not hearing any music, and it makes our ears bored while just looking at capital city burning. And you just standing there with violin in HANDS. Why you no FIDDLE while Rome burns?

    • 0 avatar

      We don’t want KXL because we won’t get the oil, China will.
      We will just get the pollution and thirty some long term jobs.

    • 0 avatar
      shaker

      Fracking for oil = Trolling for vitriol

    • 0 avatar
      natrat

      so rich whitey can sell oil to china and make the chances for life on this earth that much slimmer, sounds like a great plan,just fabulous

    • 0 avatar
      FormerFF

      Not many jobs for Americans, estimated at 5000 for the two years of construction, then about 50 from then on.

      Hey, we just reversed a different part of the Keystone pipeline at their request, look at how much lower gasoline prices are now.

      The tar sands oil is being produced and transported, what difference will it make if it is transported by pipeline? Do you think any transport cost savings will be passed on to the consumer? Have you seen any cost savings ih the oil production process EVER passed on to the consumer?

      • 0 avatar

        If you can’t see the bigger picture, then I guess you might as well be driving a Prius or some other soulless econobox for the rest of your life.

        America has enough resources to be energy-independent, but there are people who want America to be energy dependent – and people who want America involved in the Middle East – and people who want Americans to be downgraded to “car sharing” and no-car-at-all.

        • 0 avatar
          jc130

          part of the bigger picture so much of this oil goes by rail, and the rail will need to be expanded and upgraded. That is a much better long-term win than a one-off pipeline.

    • 0 avatar
      martinwinlow

      I am not a ‘tree hugger’. I just have a educated understanding of what the worlds addiction to oil is doing to the planet and the creatures that live in and on it – including us. We have spent the last 100 years wilfully wasting one of our most precious resources – oil – by burning it in hopelessly inefficient internal combustion engines. We, arguably, now have a second bite of the cherry by using fracking to get to the oil that has previously been too difficult to extract. Are you seriously suggesting we should repeat our collective stupidity all over again?

      If there was no alternative then so be it but here *is* an alternative. If manufactured at the same scale as ICE vehicles are now, it would be no more expensive and quite possibly considerably cheaper. It generates a fraction of the harmful side effects that an ICE-based transport system does. The technology is available now and the vast majority of the refuelling infrastructure is already in place. It means we can all carry on with our independent choice in and use of ‘the motor car’. It is the electric car, and before you scoff, check out Tesla Motors.

      I have driven an EV for the last 5 years, both 4 wheeled and 2, and find them to be entirely viable. I am prepared to accept that they have a long way to go on cost but it is only a question of time (and mass adoption), just like mobile phones, flat screen TVs and VCRs.

      One last point, if people think fuel prices are high now, just wait and see what they’ll be in a few years time. All the evidence is pointing at a peak oil and gas production from fracking *already* and yet more evidence shows that in the US a trillion dollars worth of investment in tracking is unlikely to produce a profit at current oil prices. This can only mean one thing – considerably higher fuel prices.

      America should be following (*leading*) the world in a high speed rail network that would provide a massive boost for jobs and the US economy in general and, at the same time, get so much of the freight that is currently trucked in an appallingly inefficient way off the roads, saving all that diesel, too.

      Or perhaps it is time to really look to the future and take a good hard look (and spend some cash on) the Hyperloop system to see if it is workable? MW

  • avatar
    thornmark

    Because of the special interests. Buffett is profiting handsomely. Plus this profiteering guy:
    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2014/04/the-epic-hypocrisy-of-tom-steyer.php

  • avatar
    davefromcalgary

    Yay more awesome stock photos!

  • avatar
    Broo

    Lower fuel prices ??? I haven’t seen a price drop in eastern Canada for quite a while, if only a cent or two.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Authors

  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • Tycho de Feyter, China
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, Abu Dhabi
  • Mark Stevenson, Canada
  • Faisal Ali Khan, India