Courtesy art

DEARBORN– AAA’s latest study shows extreme temperatures can take a meaningful toll on electric vehicles and hybrids, reducing efficiency, cutting driving range, and increasing operating costs.

To better understand those real-world impacts, AAA tested six vehicles, three EVs and three hybrids, across cold, moderate, and hot temperatures. The results provided a clearer picture of what drivers can expect when temperature swings factor into everyday driving and long-term ownership.

“This study gives drivers real‒world insight as the weather heats up,” said Adrienne Woodland, spokesperson for AAA – The Auto Club Group. “Cold temperatures had the biggest impact overall, but our testing shows hot weather also reduces efficiency and pushes operating costs higher across both EVs and hybrids.”

Key findings

Impact of hot temperatures (95°F):

– Hybrid vehicles experience a 12.0% decrease in fuel efficiency (miles per gallon, MPG).

– EVs show a 10.4% reduction in efficiency (MPGe, miles per gallon of gasoline equivalent) and an 8.5% loss of driving range compared to moderate temperature (75°F) conditions.

Impact of cold temperatures (20°F):

– Hybrids lose 22.8% in fuel economy.

– EVs demonstrate a 35.6% drop in MPGe and a 39.0% decrease in calculated driving range.

Impacts of hot temperatures (95°F) on operating costs:

– Hybrid operating costs increased by $13.02 per 1,000 mi.

– For EVs using home charging, operating costs rose by $6.78 per 1,000 mi, while public charging costs climbed $16.25 per 1,000 mi.

Impacts of cold temperatures (20°F) on operating costs:

– Hybrids showed an increase in fuel cost of $28.44 per 1,000 miles.

– EVs experienced an increase in operating costs of $32.11 per 1,000 miles when charged at home electricity rates and $76.93 per 1,000 miles when using public charging.

Powertrain Cost Comparison:

– Cold operation (20°F) showed the largest cost gap: EVs cost $36.19 less per 1,000 miles at home electricity rates, but $86.26 more using public chargers than hybrids.

– At high temperatures (95°F), EVs were $46.11 cheaper per 1,000 miles at home electricity rates, but $41.00 more expensive at public charging rates compared to hybrids.

“These results show there is no one‒size‒fits‒all answer when it comes to electrified vehicles,” Woodland said. “Where you live, how you charge, and the conditions you drive in can make a meaningful difference in efficiency and cost over time.”

Survey: More Consumers Prefer Hybrid to Fully Electric Vehicles

AAA also surveyed U.S. drivers to assess attitudes toward electrified vehicles. The results show hybrids continue to attract more interest than fully electric models.

About 35 percent of U.S. adults said they are likely or very likely to choose a hybrid for their next vehicle (new or used). Proponents of hybrids most frequently cite reduced range anxiety and charging concerns.

While the number of public charging stations nationwide has increased from about 55,000 in 2022 to roughly 80,000 today, hesitation remains. Consumers who are interested in fully electric vehicles cite benefits such as lower fuel costs, reduced environmental impact and lower maintenance expenses, but hybrids continue to appeal to drivers seeking greater convenience and flexibility.

What Drivers Should Consider

AAA urges drivers to factor climate and charging access into vehicle decisions.

Expect reduced EV range and higher energy use during extreme hot and cold weather.

Budget for higher winter operating costs, especially when relying on public charging.

Use strategies such as preconditioning the cabin while plugged in, maintaining proper tire pressure, and moderating speeds during temperature extremes.

Recognize that home charging plays a major role in keeping EV operating costs lower year‒round.

Try decision tools such as the AAA Your Driving Costs calculator to estimate vehicle ownership and operating costs, based on local climate, driving habits, and EV public charging prices from AAA Gas Price Data.

Survey Methodology

The survey was conducted March 19-23, 2026, using a probability-based panel designed to be representative of the U.S. household population overall. The panel provides sample coverage of approximately 97% of the U.S. household population. Most surveys were completed online; consumers without Internet access were surveyed over the phone.

A total of 1,088 interviews were completed among U.S. adults, 18 years of age or older. The margin of error for the study overall is +/- 4% at the 95% confidence level. Smaller subgroups have larger error margins.